Clearcutting of Forests

“To understand why deforestation is such a pressing and urgent issue, forests must first be given credit for what they bring to global ecosystems and the quality of life that all species maintain. Tropical Rain forests presently give a place to call home for 50% – 90% of all organisms, 90% of our relatives, the primates, and 50 million creatures that can live no place but the rich rain forests. Not only are other species at risk, but the human race also benefits from what the trees give.”

“Additionally, trees improve the quality of the air by trapping carbon and other particles produced by pollution. Trees determine rainfall and replenish the atmosphere. As more water gets put back in the atmosphere, clouds form and provide another way to block out the sun’s heat. Trees are what cool and regulates the earth’s climate in conjunction with other such valuable services as preventing erosion, landslides, and making the most infertile soil rich with life.” ~ The Choice: Doomsday or Arbor Day
According to the World Resources Institute, more than 80 percent of the Earth’s natural forests already have been destroyed. Up to 90 percent of West Africa’s coastal rain forests have disappeared since 1900. Trees are natural consumers of carbon dioxide—one of the greenhouse gases whose buildup in the atmosphere contributes to global warming. Destruction of trees not only removes these “carbon sinks,” but tree burning and decomposition pump into the atmosphere even more carbon dioxide, along with methane, another major greenhouse gas.~ National Geographic, Deforestation

During the lifespans of trees, they grace us with their beauty, they shade us on hot days, and they provide us with necessary oxygen, they consume carbon dioxide, and they throw much needed water into our atmosphere. As we walk among these towering giants, they stand sentinel as we unwind and let go of city stress and daily angst. ~Nothing More Noble Than Trees

So, what can we do to help stop deforestation? One thing is to understand that there are alternatives to using tree products. Industrial hemp, for instance, can replace all tree products, including paper, rope, cardboard, and plywood. Unfortunately, while industrial hemp products can be sold in the US, it’s not legal for farmers to grow it as a crop. That has to change, and we can educate the public and our government about that.

Additionally, there are a number of petitions you can sign to help prevent deforestation of specific areas, and forms online you can use to email government officials.

• Save America’s Forests
• How to Save Tropical Forests
• The Rainforests Site
• Protect an Acre
• VoteHemp.com
• Industrial Hemp
• Hemp: The Environmentally Sustainable Alternative (Part1)

In Mindful Modes of Thinking I talked a bit about the differences between knowing, trusting some information, believing, and faith. Believing in something is thinking or wanting something to be true, even though there may not be evidence to back up the claim. Sometimes people believe they have evidence, but don’t clearly understand what qualifies as evidence. Beliefs also hold a lot of emotion, conviction, or what people refer to as faith.

That’s not to say a belief is by nature wrong, but simply that you don’t know if it’s correct, or even close to being valid, yet the claim is made that it is true. Belief, by nature, is problematic.

In spite of the nebulous nature of belief, many people hold onto all kinds of beliefs from religious to superstitious to stereotypes to faulty memories. Along with belief is a certain amount of faith, determination boosted by some emotion or fear.

Personal belief may be a right, but it’s our right to let you know loudly when your beliefs infringe on our human rights, when your beliefs discriminate against us, when your beliefs hurt and demoralize us, when your beliefs are based on ignorance and oppression.

Arguing over beliefs

These problems often arise when the belief is around a god or religion. While people have the right to believe in a god, others have the right not to share that belief, and yes, even the right to criticize it. The second you make a personal belief public, it’s up for grabs.

The nature of belief is a slippery slope because of the lack of evidence. If there were evidence, it would be verifiable and belief wouldn’t even be necessary. It would be known. Scientists are generally careful to say when something is their opinion, when they suspect some information is valid, and when they propose a theory with hard core evidence that can be tested by peers.

Belief in itself operates in the opposite way. It can’t be verified, and therefore you can not expect others to accept it. I’d also go as far as to say you should question, examine, and tear down all your beliefs and be honest about what they really are.

Can we say something does not exist? No, we can’t prove something doesn’t exist. Because of that, the burden of proof is never on the non-believer. Proof must always be the burden of the one making the claim something exists or is true.

Evolution for instance has been proven to be true in a variety of ways:

• Inheritance has been proven within the personal experience of having children and seeing the similarities and differences, and recreating and testing in the lab.
• Domestic selection is common and well know in breeding plants and animals, so it becomes an easy thing for us all to observe natural selection in nature. This is also observable in the lab.
• Fossils going back millions of years for a wide range of plants and animals. We can all go to museums to see theses amazing findings.
• Genetic evidence in modern times looking at the changes in DNA for various species and seeing when they split off from each other (this evidence has been fascinating and overwhelming in proving evolution)

Evolution is not under dispute because of the overwhelming evidence, but some of the details within evolution are under interesting debate, such as why we evolved to walk upright, which primitive man developed cognitive abilities, why did certain species have various mutations.

The god belief is one that is particularly erosive to our society because it’s based in old customs and attitudes that are inappropriate for today.  When people with god beliefs feel they have the right to impose their beliefs on others through government and schools, then they violate the rights of others. God beliefs are often divisive and demoralizing to others, violating people’s human rights. This is when belief is no longer a personal right but become a public affront and menace. This is why we must protect separation of church and state, and keep religion out of schools.

You have the right to personal, private beliefs, and to share them with others. But when you cross boundaries and offend others by trying to take away their right to believe something else or not to believe you, such as in not allowing gays to marry, shaming women for various reasons, removing a woman’s right to her body, etc., name calling at atheists, then your belief is going to come under harsh scrutiny and attack.

I urge people to be as skeptical of their own thoughts and beliefs as they are of others. Examine your view every time you say something is true, or you believe in something. Examine the very nature of belief itself and see how it feels to just let go of the beliefs you’ve been carrying around.  Is a belief really worth all the angst it causes? It really is ok to say often, “I don’t know.”

But over time, mindfulness improves until you see not only the many thoughts that drift by and the temptation to follow each, but as you learn to let them drift, patterns emerge, the way you often think. Equally important is to be mindful of how we talk about modes of thinking.

In conversations recently, I realized that language confusion often arises because people are using imprecise language for their modes of thinking. The words they’re using may be close in meaning but not quite right.

For instance, I caught myself saying I believed something to be true, when in fact I did not believe it but trusted that it was probably true. There is a difference, and I’d like to hold up four modes of thinking that we need to be especially mindful of and how we talk about them with others.

The modes of thinking I’m referring to are: Knowing; Trusting, Believing, and Faith.

Knowing:  We know something when we have firsthand experience with it and can have others verify it. For instance, I know the street I live on is blocked at one end because I have seen it for myself. Additionally, this can be verified by talking to neighbors who see the same thing.

Trusting: We trust, or think,  something to be true when the information we have has come from a reliable source, and other reliable sources have verified that information. For instance, I don’t know the Sun is 98 million miles from Earth because I didn’t do any measurements myself and have someone verify them. However, I do trust that enough qualified astronomers have done this and verified the information with each other, so I consider the information reliable and is probably true.

Note: There isn’t emotional attachment in trusting that information is likely true. If scientists announce they now have a more accurate way of measuring the Sun’s distance, and they verify it with each other that’s it’s really 104 million miles away, I have no problem accepting the new number. This happens a lot in science, as the process of discovery. And, of course, in every other area of life as well.

Believing: When we believe something is true, we are certain, even though there isn’t personal, variable experience. Otherwise, we would know it. Additionally, when we believe, there is often emotional attachment to the issue, driving a need, desire, or want for it to be so. Belief is also often formed on other people’s beliefs, or opinions, which is based on belief before that and so on. Often belief comes about as a habit.

Faith: Faith is closely related to belief, and often confused with trust. While belief refers to the content of what one wants to be true, faith is the determination to hold to the belief. Faith is also emotionally driven, often by fear, or by desire.

How faith and trust get mixed up are like this. My manager is wonderful, and I trust that she will be there for me to help me prioritize my work load if I need it, to help me with difficult people, and to make me laugh. Now I could say I have faith she’ll be there for me. But that would be incorrect. I trust she will be there for me. It’s trust because it’s based on past experience, experience which is verifiable by the people we have worked with.

With both trust and faith you can end up being dead wrong. However, with trust you accept you are wrong and adjust accordingly. With faith, there is denial because it’s enforced by the emotion of wanting it to be true, and may also be driven by other psychological factors, such as fear. Faith can even become more determined in the face of evidence that what you believe is incorrect.

I realize people may have  different nuances to the definitions of these words. My point really is that it’s immensely beneficial to be mindful of your modes of thinking, how many of them are out of habit, how many are well thought out and considered, how willing you are to change your mind, and how easy or difficult it is to be wrong.

Additionally, be mindful of your speech. Notice how frequently you say you believe something, then examine exactly what that belief is based on, how much emotion is driving it, is there anything in there that can be known or verified?  Are your beliefs worth keeping, or can you drop them, move them into simple opinion, possibly due to change? Does the idea of questioning or giving up a belief frighten you?

Do we need faith for anything? Do you mean faith, or do you mean you have trust in certain areas, trust you realize could be incorrectly placed?

I found when I really became mindful to my modes of thinking and the language I communicated about them, I discovered I needed to continually reassess,examine my own opinions, and assumptions. I opened more to being wrong, which opened new doors to discovery.

And sometimes, it’s just best to say, I don’t know!

Meditation by waterfalls

I’ve noticed a common thread in talking to many new meditators and Buddhist practitioners. People want to know how meditation is going to make them happy. How long do you have to meditate to transcend to the next plane? How long do you have to meditate before getting high.  How does all this meditation get rid of my suffering?!!!!

All of the above are common myths. Buddhist meditation does not make you happy. Buddhist meditation does not make you high, or transcend you to any next level or place. The real magic of Buddhist meditation is in the journey itself. While many people do experience peace, bliss, happiness, and they do find suffering falling by the wayside, it’s not meditation that creates peace, bliss or happiness.

It’s understandable why people have these views. The way many books and articles are written, it seems like meditation is the magic that creates happiness, the calm, the composed Buddhist practitioners you may meet. Additionally, when Buddhism came to America other Eastern philosophies, metaphysical models, and religions came with it. This created confusion in a big way regarding language, and equally confusing regarding practices.

The real magic of Buddhist meditation is in the diligent practice of observation, and a willingness to let go. Observation reveals the many ways we create our own suffering, and the letting go is what allows happiness, bliss, and peace to arise in the space where suffering had been. It’s a lot like a pot of soup. Open the lid and all the wonderful aroma is released to be savored and fill the house. The lid is the suffering we normally hold on to, while the soup itself is the peace that gets buried and squashed down by delusions, cravings, and attachments.

The question often comes up, What is Jhana like? In the deeper states of meditation called Jhana, one experiences freedom,  happiness, bliss, total peace, feelings of disembodiment, etc. But What is Jhana like is the wrong question. It doesn’t matter what each of the Jhanas is like. What matters is how do you get to each. To experience Jhana at all, one must let go of the desire to follow thoughts, to be swallowed by emotions, to be enticed by stories of the mind, to be seduced into sleep, or to getting off the cushion, to resist countless desires and cravings, lust and greed, anger and sadness, boredom and excitement.

No one ever said Buddhist practices are easy. On the contrary, Buddhist meditation is hard work in the beginning, and that beginning may last years. It’s work resisting the mind and body, old habits and new desires. It also requires brutal honesty and a willingness to be wrong about many of the things you thought were right.

But little by little, as you learn to let go, just for a few seconds here and there, you experience fleeting moments of calm and quiet. This encourages one to press on, and you start to explore the nature of sound, the nature of taste, the nature of bodily feeling. Curiosity about these processes get peaked, and you learn to be in the present moment, without thoughts of the past or the future. Then the meditation magic really begins as you let go of more and more and more.

All of this letting go seeps into the rest of your life, and you’ll notice the boss doesn’t push your buttons so easily any more. You let go of that comment he made this morning without even realizing it until later reflection. You realize how good it feels not to get riled. Your practice is strengthened by these daily improvements, bits of suffering that start falling away.

Buddhist meditation is like EVERYTHING else in life. It’s a process, born of many conditions, and continuing on conditions. It’s dynamic, not static. In fact, there is nothing static, nothing permanent, and after awhile you are no longer surprised or disturbed by change.  Eventually, every part of life is practice, is mindful meditation. The meditation is not magic, the letting go is.

Buddhist meditation is about the journey, one step at a time.

I wrote about some of my exploration of labels in Everything I Learned About Labels, I Learned from my Dog. And as I dug more deeply into how I use labels in reference to myself, and explored how subtle attempts arise at creating a self with each, I realized one label I had to watch closely was the label Buddhist.

I had to ask myself, When I say I’m Buddhist, what exactly does that mean and is it limiting and creating a persona in any way? The answer may seem simple. To call oneself a Buddhist, means you follow Buddhism. Which, of course, begs the question, What is Buddhism? Exploring this question landed me right in the heart of emptiness, and the futility of concepts and labels, constructs we attempt to solidify and make permanent. And that leads to seeing impermanence, unsatisfactoriness, and emptiness.

Buddhism is an group of ideas, controversial,  and diverse. It can be argued that Buddhism is a practice, a way of living. Some say it’s a religion, while others disagree. What it is is empty of a solid, unchanging self, thingness. Buddhism does not exist in and of itself, no matter what how you define it. You can practice or preach what you consider Buddhism, but because it lacks an inherent self, a solid, permanent existence, can you really call yourself a Buddhist simply because you follow an idea of it? Can you really be a Buddhist?

As I explored these questions, I realized that to call myself a Buddhist actually went against the teaching that warns against identifying with labels. Additionally, in reality there is no such thing as Buddhist, or Buddhism. Only ideas about it.

Because of that, I do not call myself a Buddhist, though I do practice what I consider to be Buddhist practice, and that is debatable, as the practices are my understanding of what I have been taught. I make no claim to know something I can not know, nor can I claim Buddhism exists in any solidified sense.

I do, however, call myself an Atheist. Atheism, too, is empty, just as much so as Buddhism. And I recognize the reasons I call myself an Atheist. I still have attachments, based on a past in which I defended that view to people who were trying to push religion on me. Additionally, with what is happening in this country now, with the far right trying to make the US a Christian nation, I feel it’s important for non-believers to identify themselves as such, in spite of what I’ve said above.

There is a time for labels, when we need to communicate something important, or near and dear to our hearts. But I felt as I explored and learned about the emptiness of labeling, that Buddhism itself should be my project of exploration, and that was the one label I would need to be careful not to find and identity in, and prevent limiting my open exploration.

After all, the Buddha said that the practice and path is the boat that gets you across the river. Once on the other side, it wouldn’t make sense to carry the boat around. You must put it down. If you are attached to the label Buddhist, how are you going to let go of that identity in the end?

Buddha did not call himself a Buddhist after all.

More Info:

Labels, or Mindful Sinning, a podcast with The Secular Buddhist

Most likely it’s our culture that sends us looking for more, treasuring the idea that we can somehow rise above the problems of life, that there is something more special, almost magical within our grasp. We are raised to believe there is more than life itself, that what we see, in each single moment is not enough. Dissatisfaction abounds, and is encouraged by promises of more, of better.

Religions and spiritual teachers hold promise of enlightenment, or the big reward in the sky, Heaven. And so we look around, we struggle and we suffer, and we want and crave for more.

The spiritual quest is one many of us most go on, because we have to see for ourselves that this is it. Ironically, many spiritual quests give you the tools to do just that. But it’s a selfish circle you travel. The eye goes from looking outward into life, to peering inward. All attention ends up on the self, vying for improvement, for change, for that experience that elevates one into the wordless they hear so much about.

If you do it right, you end up right back where you started from, the same person you were before, but now free of the dreams, the delusions, the hopes of being someone else, somewhere above it all. Unfortunately, the human mind is an amazing source of creativity and imagination, it creates our reality on many levels, and no one can deceive you more convincingly than your own mind.

If you want it bad enough, you can teach your brain to create amazing experiences, experiences that are every bit as real as physical reality and equally convincing. But the interpretation that the event of metaphysical or religious is incorrect. If you use the other tools you’ve been taught, such as meditation and mindfulness, you can eventually see these experiences for what they really are: semi-lucid dreams, hallucinations, and fabrications.

But don’t get me wrong. The spiritual quest, though circular and selfish, is often exactly what is needed to ground us back into physical reality, to show us how we operate in the world, to see how incredibly deceptive and convincing our own minds are.  If you look hard enough, spend enough time being as skeptical of the inner landscape as the outter, you will see you are and have been, always, exactly that which you sought.

For some time, the spiritual journey is a distraction, a layer that comes between you and that which you desire. When you drop the want, the need to be other than here, in this moment, in this life, in this second being lived, you find this is all there needs to be, this is it.

It’s wonderful to see through the beliefs, the yearning, the delusions and illusions, and look to the simplicity and complexity of life itself. You can only then be content with what you’ve been dealt. Attachments drop away. Identity through labels becomes meaningless, and the need to be “spiritual” becomes a thing of the past. The search ends because you have what you sought. The cherished, selfish self takes a back seat to an amazing throng of arising and fading processes.

As you see how the self process operates, how frequently thoughts and emotions are overrated and taken too seriously,  how views and ideas are just that, you loose interest in being selfish, and turn outward to be more selfless. You can open to outter concerns, to the interdependence of all people, animals, environment and worldly things. The connections are easier to see, and the idea of anything existing in and of itself becomes ridiculous. The circle becomes laughable. The quest a bit of a joke. Yet, the tools remain useful until they too are unnecessary.

Go on the spiritual/religious quest, but don’t be surprised when you discover you were already there and this is what there is.

Ban Offshore Drilling

Buddhism has a reputation for being passive, and there are good reasons for this. All that meditation  and mindfulness we do appears passive.  And in the beginning many of us do have to mindfully hold back reactions, and refrain from falling into old active patterns that used to get us into trouble. But there is a time for apparent passiveness, and a time to act, a time to be engaged.

Actually, Buddhism is a practice, it is active, even if it appears to outsiders to be passive. Eventually the practice becomes engaged Buddhism when one actively engages in each moment as it arises, engages in activities that lessen suffering for others, and engages in ethical and moral decisions that work to the benefit of all.

In addition to being engaged in practices, however, we also need to engage ourselves in the world’s problems where we can be of help, always keeping Right Action, Right Speech, and the rest of the Eightfold Path in mind. This means working toward change, change that is going to lessen suffering and nurture improvement.

But as we step out into the world, and sometimes, into the political arena, it can be easy to fall into old habits. Anger may arise in reaction to situations so be wary, be mindful to your response as you meet up with people who seem to thrive of pain and destruction. This is what often sends many a Buddhist running back to the cushion to retreat from the world. But retreat not.

Robina Courtin, my former Lama Mama, my first Buddhist teacher, often said, “Send me to where people suffer the most because that is where I can do the most good.” No place intimidated her. No place overwhelmed her. She spent much of her time in prisons throughout the US, with men on death row, teaching inmates how to meditate, how to look into themselves and see what is really there. No ghetto was bad enough, no city big enough for her.

While becoming a monk or nun and joining a monastery is one way to follow the path, it’s certainly not the most common, and it can be argued if monastery life is the most effective means of practice. For most of us, every day life is our practice ground, and the greater problems that call to our attention really test our principals, our ethics, our views, our sense of self or lack there of. Additionally, employment not only gives us a place and situations to practice what we learn from teachings and being on the cushion, jobs provide money that can help make a difference in the world, alleviate suffering, or help push a good cause.

Going out and making a difference is where we put the pedal to the metal, so to speak. There are many ways we can help from volunteering to spreading awareness. Volunteers are needed for hands on work in many areas from helping in shelters for the homeless or battered women, clean up in state parks, and a number of other areas. Additionally there is a great deal you can do via the Internet.

Secular Coalition of America

Sites like Care2.org, Defenders of Wildlife,  Secular Coalition of America, VoteHemp.org and The Environmental Defense Fund not only provide online petitions, but they also provide a thought out email you can send your state Representative, Congress persons, Senators, and even the President to either protest or support a bill or issue. Spend a little time each day reading through the issues posted on these sites, signing petitions, or filling in your address fields to send emails to government officials. And donate what money you can. These organizations do what they can on donations, and your dollars can make a big difference.

Petitions and letters to government officials are great for getting your opinions out there, but we also must go that extra step at times. For combating the issue of violations of church and state, I felt I had to do more. Lo and behold, I discovered a site via a Facebook post about the Secular Coalition of America, a 501(c)4 advocacy organization whose purpose is to amplify the diverse and growing voice of the nontheistic community in the United States.

I went to their site to learn more about the current issues, the laws and wording in the US constitution regarding these problems, and I signed up for Action Alerts. Additionally, I discovered the Executive Director Sean Faircloth was speaking in my area about grassroots and starting SCA branches in each state. Now, I have an organization to speak my concerns and lobby on my behalf.

I signed up to donate monthly, and spread the word virally through social networks like Facebook and Twitter, plus Second Life(SL). I own the Secular Community in SL, and have created an interactive board with the SCA website on it. Additionally, I am informing SL citizens about this organization, sharing the problems of violations of church and state, and hope to grow awareness in a huge way.

As Sean talked about starting grassroots and getting involved in some of these very sticky issues, he stressed the need to stay cool and calm, to stick to the facts that back you up (mainly the US Constitution), but also not to get lost in wanting to change the religious mind into an atheist/Buddhist frame of mine. Really, what he was referring to was Right Speech.

In talking to people about these issues, stay tuned into what you are really saying, keep the acrimony out of your voice, and appeal to reason. This is the place to practice mindful speech and Right Action. Always question if your actions and behavior are going to cause more suffering or lessen it.

Defenders of Wildlife

The world needs a lot of help. Environmental issues abound where you can donate time or money. In the US there are violations of separation of church and state that need our attention. Every city has its share of shelters, homeless people, and issues where you can help by signing petitions, writing articles to make people more aware, and donating money.

Most of us find that the Buddhist practice eliminates suffering in our personal lives in big ways. Eventually the practice moves away from the practitioner to people out in the world, and the situations that are causing pain and suffering. This is where engaged Buddhism falls into place, where you can help make a difference to the suffering outside yourself.

Most of my personal explorations into a Buddhist teaching started with the desire to prove the teaching incorrect. It’s just my nature to swim upstream.  And the whole area of attachment was no different. But, I had to admit in a short period of time that, yes, at the bottom of all my cravings lie attachment, and that stinkin’ attachment was causing me to suffer.

My attachments have had much examination under the mental microscope over the years, and it’s no easy task to get beneath them and pop them free. But I realized a part of the mechanism that was feeding my attachments was the language I used regarding labels and titles.

Of course we need labels and titles for communication purposes, or we would never understand one another. The problem arises, unmindfully usually, when we get attached to labels and identify through them. For instance, even though I wanted my divorce, talking in terms of I and me instead of us and we took a bit of adjusting and breaking of habit. It seemed strange to only refer to myself, instead of us. Even more difficult was adjusting to a new job title, as I strongly identified through the previous one.

This got me thinking about Buddhist teachings regarding how we get attached to titles and come to identify through them. We create an illusory me, an I am a technical writer, or I am a wife. Yet, when I looked closely, I realized that was simply a mind fabrication, a slippery identity at best. And there was confusion, readjusting, and suffering beneath those titles.

I looked more deeply into the many labels I used in reference to myself, examined the desire beneath each, and little by little mindfully let them go. I realized the first I had to send packing was a title I had come to take pride in, cherished on many levels, and had created an illusory self around. That title was Buddhist!

Digging into this label I found myself burrowing down a deep rat hole. Being attached to such a title went against the teachings, yet dropping it seemed to betray myself in way. The teachings I had continually tried to disprove actually proved correct and understanding them was beneficial. I searched inward, examined the many layers of identity and attachment, and little by little realized that like everything else the title Buddhist is not only empty, but pointed at nothing, really nothing at all!

You could argue a Buddhist is one who follows Buddhism. For conversation’s sake, yes, that is true.  But what is Buddhism? It’s another label. On top of that label is much controversy, discussion, and even arguments over what real  Buddhism is. Buddhism is a label, and the definition of that label is whatever someone says it is, or whatever group decides it is. Oh, no, that’s not right you might argue! Buddhism is this . . .

Buddhism, like everything else is empty. Buddhism lacks an unchanging, eternal anything. Buddhism does not exist in of itself. It only exists as a label for some common teachings, teachings which are also empty, teachings that had come from the Buddha, who is also controversial and empty. If you read the history of Buddhism, you’ll discover the concepts existed long before Siddartha, person/character, was said to have been born. It was not until hundreds of years after the person/character’s death that these teachings were put to writing. Buddhism itself is quite fuzzy in terms of what is truth, or correct.

My head filled with spaghetti thoughts as I tried to sort it out. I let it all go, and then the clarity came . . .  to label myself a Buddhist would be limiting, it would encourage an illusory identity, and one I could not defend as it needs not be defended, as there is nothing to defend.

Now, I say, “I practice Secular Buddhism, but I do not call myself a Buddhist.” Interestingly, I have a come across many others doing they same, as they also saw Buddhist as a label, a limiting title, and an empty one at that.

Yet, even as the label Secular is empty, many of us to identify with its lack of ritual and religious beliefs. We practice Secular Buddhism as much for what it’s not as we do for what is it developing into. Secular Buddhism does have a definition for communication purposes. And it’s interesting to me as I get into discussions about defining Secular Buddhism, I find myself confronted by a lot of attachment to traditional Buddhism (many different traditions), this thing people have created in their minds and have come to identify themselves with. The discussions often seem quite unBuddhist to me.

Atheists  don’t have as much problem defining the word for people as Secular Buddhists do, but even that label sparks controversy. Atheism is simply non-theist, yet Atheists now carry the connotation of being certain there is no God, or claiming there aren’t any gods. And while I know also that Atheist is empty, under controversy, that is a label I still wear. Why? Well, honestly, I am still attached to it.

At 10 years old I declared myself an atheist to my Christian family, and I’ve spent so many years defending that position, I find it difficult to give up. Additionally, in these stressful times where fanatical religions  are asserting themselves, I feel myself pushing back with that very pointedly rebellious title.

So, when people ask about my religion, I say I am an Atheist who practices Secular Buddhism. It’s a mouthful, but it addresses how far I’ve come in unhitching some of my attachments to labels and Buddhism, while reminding me I still have more work to do in areas of attachment, title making, and finding my way  to being completely free  of me-making on all levels.

But this path is one that is common to many in the US, and worldwide. Sadly, many people who are drawn to Buddhism get snared, fall for the same religious suspension of logic and reason, and accept fabricated belief systems just like in many other religions. Yet, all that goes against the very principles that Buddha taught.

Buddha did not do prostrations. He did not pray to statues. He did not pray at all. He did not use mala beads, nor did he assign himself or anyone else to be Lamas. Buddha didn’t teach special monks to give blessings, did not teach rituals that would free one of their “negative karma.” No, quite the opposite.

Like Batchelor, my studies in Buddhism begin with the Tibetan Mahayana tradition. Truthfully, in the beginning I didn’t even know there were different traditions, and I didn’t understand how vastly they differed from one another, nor did I know some actually go wide and far of what the Buddha likely taught. Like many people, I was drawn by the teaching that said we are to think for ourselves, to examine the teachings in our own experience, and if they didn’t work to reject them. I was also compelled by the powerful code of ethics, explained on an internal level, which I very much agree with. The benefits of meditation tools quickly made an impression on me.

Yet, as I progressed through my studies with a nun of this tradition, I questioned frequently the teaching on rebirth after the death of the body, on being reborn in animal or Hell realms, etc. I doubted karma could travel one life to the next, even were rebirth after death of the body possible. Underlying my questions was the teaching that I was to disregard what I could not test, disregard superstition and metaphysics. But my questions went unanswered, dismissed as though those answers would reveal themselves to me as I progressed.

In my second year in the Tibetan Mahayana tradition, a sentence in the Lamp of Enlightenment sent my head reeling. “If you turn away from Mahayana, you will be reborn in the Hell realms many, many times over.” The final big red flag went up. I realized then and there what had been bothering me all along. This stunk of religion! Threats of Hell. This could not possibly be known, or claim to be any kind of truth. This felt like the church of my youth, and with that threat aimed at me, I left that tradition.

So, now the Christian church and the Tibetan Mahayana tradition condemn me to Hell. So be it! Pooh, pooh to them.

But I was not ready to dismiss Buddhism entirely. In spite of all the rituals, prayers, and mala counting that made no sense to me and mostly seemed ridiculous, there had been some valuable teachings in there too. Meditation was teaching me to know my own mind and body, to be more present in my daily life, to see how incredibly attached I was to certain things, and the suffering that brought to me. I was fairly sure that while Tibetan Mahayana was full of religious nonsense, there had been enough  Buddhism there for me to know Buddha had been onto something valuable.

I explored in Zen and the Theravada traditions, and was careful to make sure the authors of the books I read did not follow Tibetan Buddhism.  Zen and Theravada seemed closer to the mark, less praying, less chanting, and more meditating. The focus now was directed at the Eightfold Path and the 5 ethical precepts. I settled in for some time, relieved not to have to hear about hell realms and unlikely human rebirths. But as I dug deeper, and benefited, I was again disturbed by subtle ways logic was cast aside.

Rebirth after death was still being taught, but now the explanations focused on consciousness, some kind of new formation of it, something fuzzy and hazy that no one could explain, and again gave me that, “One day you will see for yourself.” That again. Sigh.

I then stumbled upon Stephan Batchelor’s book Buddhism without Beliefs, and felt a deep connection with this author. He explained that it was quite possible that the teachings had been misinterpreted, or Buddha quite possibly had some beliefs of the times he lived in. In any case, there were suggestions that many of the teachings were simply misinterpreted by those who harbored many beliefs.

And the more I continued my own practice, the more I saw into the workings of how a new self arises, dies, and arises, and repeats, the more I became convinced that rebirth and death were but metaphors. About that time, I met a group of people in Second Life called Skeptical Buddhists. The name appealed to me right away, as I was a born skeptic. These folks weren’t just buying Buddhist teachings hook, line, and sinker, but were carefully examining them, looking into their own experiences to verify or deny the validity of such a teaching. Additionally, they weren’t buying into the ritual and religious BS like the other traditions. As it turned out, they were covering chapters of Batchelor’s Buddhism Without Beliefs book.

I was drawn to this group, continued with my Buddhist practice, and more importantly continued being skeptical, trying out the teachings, and marveling at some of the results. Instead of being transformed into something special, instead of being lifted out the normality of life, I was finding myself more and more in tune with this life being lived, and getting back into my very comfortable atheist skin. The only things pure atheism had not provided were the tools for understanding the workings of my own being, and a way of understanding ethics from inside out.

Skeptical Buddhism, or Secular Buddhism, is free of religious trappings and dogma. Instead we study the English translation of the Pali Canon with the skeptical eye the Buddha encouraged, the willingness to look within our own lives and existence, and in the process free ourselves of many the delusions that have been yanking us around our entire lives. Above all else, this process teaches one to scrutinize, study, examine. Belief is not for us. Belief is for the religious, those willing to accept what someone else believes, who accepts what some else again believes, and on and on.

Secular Buddhism is growing in this country, and is often misinterpreted as Buddhism for Americans, to accommodate our fat and greedy needs. On the contrary, that is not the case. But it sure makes us see quickly how fat and greedy we are, and how we cling to all the things that support our desires. Secular Buddhism attempts to revive the very practical ideas of the Buddha, without the religious nonsense people added to it, or the many ways they have misunderstood the teachings.

Recently, I acquired a SIM of my own, an island in Second Life, where I am building a Secular/Skeptical Buddhist Community to augment the Skeptical Buddhist sangha. Here, you won’t find Asian decorations everywhere, you won’t find statues of Buddha’s, nor will you see prayer flags flapping about. Instead, we are creating an environment for modern day secular/skeptical Buddhists who have concerns not only for their own well being but for animals and the environment. We have a redwood forest, a hemp garden with information on how hemp products can replace tree products, we have solar panels and turbines, and you can get around the island via canoe, horseback, bike, or rowboat. We offer tai chi/yoga, as well as meditation, sutta study classes, and fun at the drum and dance circle. Stop by and join the fun.

Secular/Skeptical Buddhist Community in Second Life

What is Skeptical Buddhism? video

Why Skeptical Buddhism? video

Yosemite

When I was around 8, I realized that to rely on belief was insubstantial and unsatisfying. For that reason, I rejected the religion I’d been brought up in and happily sat within the realm of non-belief. Yet, many years later, though I enjoyed the discovery processes of science and all there was to learn (and I still do), I felt a lacking in my life, hovering in the back of mind. Though my natural temperament is generally “happy”, I didn’t feel as engaged in my life as I could be.

Books on spirituality jumped out at me. I avoided religious materials as I saw no reason to go in that direction, but something about the word spiritual struck a chord. I set out on a journey for “truth” for that special something I couldn’t quite name. I pursued several areas in metaphysics, had some really bizarre and interesting experiences, but all of that seemed always to deal with areas outside of physical life, areas of the unknown. While all that was intriguing, that something, that internal itch just wasn’t being scratched.

When I stumbled upon Buddhism, quite literally after falling down a ladder and having a friend recommend I Google mindfulness, I felt drawn to this “religion.” I was intrigued by the Buddha’s claim that all life is suffering, yet there was a way out. I didn’t feel like I was suffering, but I was interested in his claim that I was. In addition, I felt it compelling that all the teachings, and the teachers explaining the teachings, ended with, “Don’t believe me. I don’t want you to develop yet another view. I want you to see for yourself, to know what I say is true.” Seeing is knowing, not believing. Hmmm . . . .

I set out on what has now been a 7 year journey through Buddhist territory. Mindfulness was not only intriguing, but I felt drawn to it and benefited as soon as I started practicing. Meditation turned out to be hard and painful, yet I could see and know the benefit right within my personal experience. I also saw for myself that craving and desire do indeed create suffering in myself. Clinging and attachment painfully showed itself through self observation, mindfulness. I realized the Buddha was right . . . I was suffering, and that suffering had set me on the spiritual search.

Little by little, I realized that itch was not a desire for more, it was not a need to understand that which is beyond, but instead the itch came from the suffering and delusion I had previously been so blind to, had covered up in various ways and habits. But the Buddhist path is not easy. I wanted to jump off many times. It takes continual vigilance, it takes understanding ethics and morality on an internal level, it takes persistence.  Even so, several times I leaped, indulged in craving and clinging, and yes, suffered the consequences.

There were also teachings that rubbed me the wrong way, that smacked of metaphysical claims, and religious nonsense. I felt confusion over conflicting teachings, teachings that seemed to go against some basic Buddhist concepts. I stopped reading people’s commentary on the teachings and took a course in the English translation of the Pali Canon. I realized then that many of the Buddhist traditions (schools) had incorporated cultural beliefs and religious beliefs and ritual.You can see my blog on the topic of reading source material Don’t Be Lazy: Go to the Source. But I also discovered that I’m just not convinced of some of the teachings the Buddha gave.  After all, seeing is knowing and claims of rebirth after death is not only something I can’t know, but it goes against what I am experiencing with no self.

Yet, I am not willing to throw away the practice because Buddha has proven so much to me through my experience. I’m also not willing to just accept certain teachings, but I am willing to investigate further.

I have a good understanding of mindfulness and continue to improve and refine, make it a 24/7 habit. My problem is I can see the greed, anger, and hatred as they arise, but they do continue to repeatedly arise. It’s not how I want to be. It’s not how I want to view the world. I’ve decided I need to focus my practice on concentration meditation. The Jhanas seemed beyond and impossible, even pointless. But now as I progress through this practice, I am reading how concentration is what purifies the mind. I’m curious to see if this is true.

I am also skeptical, yes. And as for the immaterial Jhanas, not only am I skeptical but I am suspicious that these are states of delusion, early metaphysical nonsense that Buddha accepted. But I am not willing to close my mind either, as so far I have no been able to prove the Buddha wrong, and there is something in the Jhanas that intrigues me in a big way:  seeing the objects are mostly made of space and the rupa-kalapas, which are something like atoms.

When a scientist asked the Dalai Lama what he thought of objects being made of atoms and having mostly space, he laughed and said meditators have known this before  Buddha’s time. And indeed this is what the Buddha taught. How could they have known this through seeing and knowing? I’m intrigued and compelled to explore this matter further.

But to get there I have to let go of much: fear, anger, hatred, aversion, clinging, desire. I have to learn concentration and be able to sit for hours at a time. I would think it utterly impossible except when I was on a Jhana retreat with my teacher Shaila Catherine, I did almost get to the first Jhana. I had actually experienced a quite mind. Within that silence, with no greed, anger, frustration, anxiety, boredom, etc, and with no thoughts rising, the natural feeling of calm and bliss arose, a contentment I had never experienced before. It wasn’t a state I created, a feeling I made, but instead what I experienced was what comes naturally when the mind is quiet and at peace. And even that must be let go of. Jhanas are all about letting go. It’s like the old onion metaphor,  you peel away layers of angst, sadness, anger, resistance, clinging, thoughts, emotions, etc until you get to the mind’s natural state. It’s amazing how much crud we have sitting on top.

So, my intention this year is more seeing and knowing. I want to refocus my meditation practice with enthusiasm, with the idea of just seeing what happens and where it takes me. If I discover the Buddha to be correct, wonderful. If not, I will adjust accordingly.

But so far I have not been able to prove him wrong. Seeing is knowing, so I’ll find out where that leads.