Last week I found myself trying to increase my awareness and identify my sense-of-self in my everyday activities. Even now I am aware of my mind thinking about what I’m going to do after I write this post instead of embracing the stillness of Now. By doing this, I’ve been able to see how often I move away from my suffering as opposed to towards it, and I’ve been amazed how often my mind tries to uncover or create a problem in my heightened awareness where this is none.
Rodney Smith’s book has continued to keep me on track and question my conditioning. I think most importantly he has provided me with reference points where I am able to identify where I am on my path and what I need to do to further my progress.
One of the more interesting things that he has mentioned is how our minds are constantly creating mental alternatives to our reality and seeking solutions to problems that are non-existent. It is the smaller conflicts of agitation, worry, restlessness, etc. that cause us the most suffering because of how they build up over time. As a result of these conflicts, the mind desires to manipulate a person’s reality because of perceived discomfort. For example, a person is agitated because a room is too cold, so she desires to change the temperature. In this particular scenario the person has perceived that the cool temperature is a negative thing and as a result has grown a negative attachment. Thus, as a result of this attachment, the person has developed agitation, a form of suffering. If the person were to examine the feeling of the cool temperature without any positive or negative attachment thereby letting go of her agitation, she would find that she would have no desire to manipulate her reality to suit her.
I think the biggest lesson I have learned (this week) from Smith is to question everything. The very essence of the Dharma is to hold a questioning attitude toward everything and rest on the certainty of nothing. Even in determining one’s practice, you have to question what you are doing and for what purpose. Smith mentions that even then there are only certain questions that come out of wise view. Those questions that start with “what” and “who” are much better than “why” or “how”. My take on it is that asking the question of “why” assumes that the subject of the question, which we have perceived through our unwise view, actually is. Thus, “what” is more appropriate because you are re-examining your perception of the subject and thus are able to reexamine your attachment to it.
The lesson that has me thinking the most this week is Smith’s words on sincerity and intention. He describes people as having 2 intentions in their practice-one that comes from the heart (primary intention) and one that comes from the mind (secondary). The primary intention, as Smith defines it, is always peace. The secondary is your mundane desires, conditioning, and suffering. Ultimately, you have to come to the realization that your primary intention is more important and forego the desires of the secondary. This is not always easy and frankly, this is what determines how serious you are about your practice. Of course, this has me thinking about whether I am able to do what is necessary and if my true intention toward enlightenment is strong enough. Have I ultimately experienced enough suffering from my secondary desires to know the value of peace?
This week I will be continuing on my month long dedication to Buddhism. Stay tuned for more insight. Namaste!
No comments:
Post a Comment