Just a bit busy so I will make a short post today, but short does not mean lack of intensity. This could be a prelude to a theme I would like to develop at another time on one version of the golden rule - Love others as you would yourself - that to me has many layers in it I would like to try and share one day. Another day. Today I will present a couple of short quotes from Nisargadatta which I believe are contemplation-worthy. Before I do, I just have to explain for those who are not familiar with his philosophy, that when he speaks of dreaming he refers to what we call living and when he talks of awaking he refers to seeing life and living as it really is...
In dream you love some and not others. On waking up you find you are love itself, embracing all. Personal love, however intense and genuine, invariably binds; love in freedom is love of all.
When you are love itself, you are beyond time and numbers. In loving one you love all, in loving all, you love each.
Have a wonderful weekend.
Friday, January 30, 2009
Thursday, January 29, 2009
[Thoughts on work] Note to myself
I have always been struggling with what to do "when I grow up" in terms of earning a living. I think I would like to earn a living from writing. I know I can earn a living from teaching. And every now and then I am tempted to stop dabbling and take a serious dive into business - because I am probably pretty good at it but mostly because I think I could earn a lot of (or a lot more) money... Usually, a short time after the latter axis of thinking, I end up shaking myself by the shoulders (not easy to do) and sternly telling the guy in the mirror 'what are you thinking?!' It's a cycle...
A friend of mine gave me a wonderful little book (yes, a recurrent theme) called Simple Truths by Kent Nerburn (Amazon link to book here). The subtitle is 'clear and gentle guidance on the big issues in life', and it is quite apt to what you will find inside. Once again, my skeptical side came out and I judged the book by its cover, expecting to find watered-down, easy, American-style spirituality. I underestimated my friends discerning taste and wisdom (please accept my apology! (and read yesterday's post : ))) and Kent Nerburn's wisdom (sorry Kent).
I picked it up today, flipped through it and landed on a chapter called "On Work" and since I have been thinking about this quite a bit of late (I'm in the cycle), I reread the chapter with interest. Here is some of the original text:
Choose your work carefully.
No matter how much you might believe that your work is nothing more than what you do to make money, your work makes you who you are, because it is where you put your time.
We are what we do, and the more we do it, the more we become it. By giving a job your time, you are giving it your consciousness. Eventually it will fill your life with the reality that it presents.
And
You should think of work as vocation, which comes from the Latin word for calling, which comes from the word for voice. In those meanings it touches on what work should really be-- something that calls to you, that gives voice to who you are and what you want to say in the world.
If you find a vocation, embrace it. You have found a way to contribute to the world with love.
I like how Kent thinks and writes. Soft spoken wisdom and thought-provoking. The whole book is a little gem.
In regards to work, maybe because I work alone in front of a computer often, I have been thinking that maybe work is not about work at all but all about relationships.
As I hear from people around me how great and enriching (rare) or awful and frustrating (common) it is to work in a big, medium, little company, I wonder if all work is, really, just an excuse to force us to work on relationship issues. Not with people we love per se, or choose to work with or spend time with, but the infamous "other" that is thrust upon us.
Maybe the point of work is that it is the soul's way of putting us in situations in which we must depend upon and get along with people who we do not share a natural affinity for, in which we are not comfortable, in which we need to realize that a lot of the "what" of work is less important than the "how" of working with people. Maybe it is the devious little soul's way of teaching us the important lessons that we cannot learn with our friends, family and loved ones... Just a thought.
A friend of mine gave me a wonderful little book (yes, a recurrent theme) called Simple Truths by Kent Nerburn (Amazon link to book here). The subtitle is 'clear and gentle guidance on the big issues in life', and it is quite apt to what you will find inside. Once again, my skeptical side came out and I judged the book by its cover, expecting to find watered-down, easy, American-style spirituality. I underestimated my friends discerning taste and wisdom (please accept my apology! (and read yesterday's post : ))) and Kent Nerburn's wisdom (sorry Kent).
I picked it up today, flipped through it and landed on a chapter called "On Work" and since I have been thinking about this quite a bit of late (I'm in the cycle), I reread the chapter with interest. Here is some of the original text:
Choose your work carefully.
No matter how much you might believe that your work is nothing more than what you do to make money, your work makes you who you are, because it is where you put your time.
We are what we do, and the more we do it, the more we become it. By giving a job your time, you are giving it your consciousness. Eventually it will fill your life with the reality that it presents.
And
You should think of work as vocation, which comes from the Latin word for calling, which comes from the word for voice. In those meanings it touches on what work should really be-- something that calls to you, that gives voice to who you are and what you want to say in the world.
If you find a vocation, embrace it. You have found a way to contribute to the world with love.
I like how Kent thinks and writes. Soft spoken wisdom and thought-provoking. The whole book is a little gem.
In regards to work, maybe because I work alone in front of a computer often, I have been thinking that maybe work is not about work at all but all about relationships.
As I hear from people around me how great and enriching (rare) or awful and frustrating (common) it is to work in a big, medium, little company, I wonder if all work is, really, just an excuse to force us to work on relationship issues. Not with people we love per se, or choose to work with or spend time with, but the infamous "other" that is thrust upon us.
Maybe the point of work is that it is the soul's way of putting us in situations in which we must depend upon and get along with people who we do not share a natural affinity for, in which we are not comfortable, in which we need to realize that a lot of the "what" of work is less important than the "how" of working with people. Maybe it is the devious little soul's way of teaching us the important lessons that we cannot learn with our friends, family and loved ones... Just a thought.
Wednesday, January 28, 2009
Apologies
Today the post will be quite short and more of a thought piece and a call for your comments and ideas.
I had an interesting exchange with a friend today on the subject of apologies. I was reminded of the Course in Miracles' take on forgiveness and I want to share that here.
For anyone who has not read the Course (as it is often called) you should know that it not very intuitive and trying to read it makes the Bible (Old Testament) feel like easy reading. It is one of those books that needs to be reread a few times to understand it (or rather each time you read it you will probably understand it differently). I will give you an example, in regards to how it speaks about forgiveness (page 638 from the blue edition):
Unjustified forgiveness is attack. And this is all the world can ever give. It pardons "sinners" sometimes, but remains aware that they have sinned. [...] This is the false forgiveness which the world employs to keep the sense of sin alive.[...]Thus is the fear of God the sure result of seeing pardon as unmerited. No one who sees himself as guilty can avoid the fear of God.
You see what I mean?
By the way, this passage reminds me (and my crazy associative mind) of the Grand Inquisitor section of Dostoyevsky's Brothers Karamazov (which you can find online without a problem) in which the Grand Inquisitor rebukes a Christ-like Messiah figure that comes to Earth and tells the Messiah (here I am paraphrasing very liberally) we are not going to let you ruin the work we have done to repair the wrongs you have done to humanity putting ideas about freedom and forgiveness into their weak minds...
Anyway, back to the Course's take on forgiveness. My (probably superficial) understanding of it goes something like this: accepting an apology is a terrible thing to do! it means you are putting yourself in a position of superiority vis-a-vis the person who is asking for your forgiveness, and if you accept the apology, i.e. accept to forgive, well then you are accepting to place yourself in a position of (moral) superiority. Exaggerating slightly it would be like the apologizer saying, 'Oh superior one, please show your superior grace and accept your lowly subject's apology'. Now from what I understood from the Course, and it makes sense to me is that the only way to truly accept an apology, is to realize and share that realization with the person asking to apologize that there is nothing to forgive. This way both are again in a position of equality.
The lead up to this chapter is quite long, and to understand it properly you probably need to read and understand everything that precedes it (not sure I did). The basic idea, once again if I have understood it as intended is that 1/ only things that are done out of love are real and lasting which means that 2/ nothing that is done otherwise really exists and 3/ even if you believe that bad things happen to you in actuality they happened and you were there, they were not done to you.
For example, if you get sick, it wasn't done to you, it is just happening to you. Why you? Well, why not you? As the saying goes, shit happens, and sometimes it happens to you. You can decide to take it personally or understand that it happens and is part of life. Same event, but a different attitude. The same thing when you are hurt in one form or another by another. You can feel terribly insulted (i.e. need to forgive) or have compassion and wonder what happened to the other person to make them want to do what they did. Same event, two different reactions. One requires an apology, the other is an expression of compassion.
I wish I could say that I have integrated this into my life, but please forgive me if I don't always show that wisdom ; )
In any case, the answer my friend gave me was quite interesting and wise too. I won't quote it because 1/I haven't asked for permission and 2/I don't want friends to have the feeling that their private e-mails could show up on my public blog but suffice it to say the idea was that apologies are, more than anything, about accepting our mistakes in order to learn from them and move on. That a true apology is difficult, humbling and a very generous act.
My only comment to that would be that maybe wisdom is recognizing instances in which we may have hurt someone and to apologize sincerely for it - not because we are looking for forgiveness but out of compassion for making someone feel uncomfortable. On the flip side, when apologized too, it is about helping ourselves and the other to realize that there is really nothing to forgive. It would seem that the two are not incompatible.
A final word, I read the Course in Miracles while my father was dying of cancer and I was literally reading the book to try and work a miracle. That is NOT what the book is about. It is more about the miracle of daily life, of seeing life as it is, not as it is not, and seeing the miraculous everywhere. But I tried...
I had an interesting exchange with a friend today on the subject of apologies. I was reminded of the Course in Miracles' take on forgiveness and I want to share that here.
For anyone who has not read the Course (as it is often called) you should know that it not very intuitive and trying to read it makes the Bible (Old Testament) feel like easy reading. It is one of those books that needs to be reread a few times to understand it (or rather each time you read it you will probably understand it differently). I will give you an example, in regards to how it speaks about forgiveness (page 638 from the blue edition):
Unjustified forgiveness is attack. And this is all the world can ever give. It pardons "sinners" sometimes, but remains aware that they have sinned. [...] This is the false forgiveness which the world employs to keep the sense of sin alive.[...]Thus is the fear of God the sure result of seeing pardon as unmerited. No one who sees himself as guilty can avoid the fear of God.
You see what I mean?
By the way, this passage reminds me (and my crazy associative mind) of the Grand Inquisitor section of Dostoyevsky's Brothers Karamazov (which you can find online without a problem) in which the Grand Inquisitor rebukes a Christ-like Messiah figure that comes to Earth and tells the Messiah (here I am paraphrasing very liberally) we are not going to let you ruin the work we have done to repair the wrongs you have done to humanity putting ideas about freedom and forgiveness into their weak minds...
Anyway, back to the Course's take on forgiveness. My (probably superficial) understanding of it goes something like this: accepting an apology is a terrible thing to do! it means you are putting yourself in a position of superiority vis-a-vis the person who is asking for your forgiveness, and if you accept the apology, i.e. accept to forgive, well then you are accepting to place yourself in a position of (moral) superiority. Exaggerating slightly it would be like the apologizer saying, 'Oh superior one, please show your superior grace and accept your lowly subject's apology'. Now from what I understood from the Course, and it makes sense to me is that the only way to truly accept an apology, is to realize and share that realization with the person asking to apologize that there is nothing to forgive. This way both are again in a position of equality.
The lead up to this chapter is quite long, and to understand it properly you probably need to read and understand everything that precedes it (not sure I did). The basic idea, once again if I have understood it as intended is that 1/ only things that are done out of love are real and lasting which means that 2/ nothing that is done otherwise really exists and 3/ even if you believe that bad things happen to you in actuality they happened and you were there, they were not done to you.
For example, if you get sick, it wasn't done to you, it is just happening to you. Why you? Well, why not you? As the saying goes, shit happens, and sometimes it happens to you. You can decide to take it personally or understand that it happens and is part of life. Same event, but a different attitude. The same thing when you are hurt in one form or another by another. You can feel terribly insulted (i.e. need to forgive) or have compassion and wonder what happened to the other person to make them want to do what they did. Same event, two different reactions. One requires an apology, the other is an expression of compassion.
I wish I could say that I have integrated this into my life, but please forgive me if I don't always show that wisdom ; )
In any case, the answer my friend gave me was quite interesting and wise too. I won't quote it because 1/I haven't asked for permission and 2/I don't want friends to have the feeling that their private e-mails could show up on my public blog but suffice it to say the idea was that apologies are, more than anything, about accepting our mistakes in order to learn from them and move on. That a true apology is difficult, humbling and a very generous act.
My only comment to that would be that maybe wisdom is recognizing instances in which we may have hurt someone and to apologize sincerely for it - not because we are looking for forgiveness but out of compassion for making someone feel uncomfortable. On the flip side, when apologized too, it is about helping ourselves and the other to realize that there is really nothing to forgive. It would seem that the two are not incompatible.
A final word, I read the Course in Miracles while my father was dying of cancer and I was literally reading the book to try and work a miracle. That is NOT what the book is about. It is more about the miracle of daily life, of seeing life as it is, not as it is not, and seeing the miraculous everywhere. But I tried...
Tuesday, January 27, 2009
[Continued] Thoughts on Conversations with God
(continued from yesterday)
If I had to choose one major actionable insight from Conversations with God, before rereading it afresh, I would have to say it is “What would love do now?” as a guiding question to answer most decisions we are faced with.
To better understand this question, I probably need to explain that it is premised on another key idea from the book, namely that everything we do is motivated either by love or fear. (Note, this is very similar to what the Course in Miracles has to say, the main difference being that in the Course in Miracles it is written that only love is real; meaning that only acts of love are lasting and thus real. The inference then is that we have a choice at all times - do anything we do out of love or from a place without love…).
Another five word powerhouse (like 'the content of their character')... “What would love do now?”
While I do not remember to use it often enough as a prologue to action, nor has it become a reflex, when I have applied it, it has been quite powerful.
One of the rare times I do think of it is when I have a potentially disagreeable e-mail to write to write to someone who has ticked me off. Instead of writing what I would have spontaneously written (a more or less poetic and subtle version of ‘screw you’) I try to reframe my attitude and say, ok, what would love do now? I try to find a feeling of love, caring and compassion for the person in question and then I write my e-mail. Sometimes it works well for me and sometimes it doesn’t (usually when my ego says ‘go ahead, give ‘em a kick in the balls, you know you want to…’ or something to that effect). But I try, and when it works, it feels really, really, good and it works wonders.
If you do apply it, let me know how it works for you.
Another incredible insight, from the beginning of the first book has to do with Joy, Truth and Love. According to Walsch, according to God, These three are interchangeable, and one always leads to the other. It matters not in which order they are placed. The Highest Thought is always the thought which contains joy. The Clearest Words are those words which contain truth. The Grandest Feeling is that feeling which you call love.
Just the first book covers so many topics that no blog entry could ever do them or the book justice. Values, morals, creativity, sexuality, finding your own way, free will, religion, finding your own way, being happy, desire, gratitude, what God is not, what religion is not, what prayer is not, what you are not, and on it goes. The subtitle of the books is ‘An uncommon dialogue” and it really is.
Trying to skip through the book to find nuggets to report back to you I realized I so marked up the book that there is hardly a page without underlining, stars, exclamation points, comments, notes to self… and I realized I want to reread it from start to finish again from a clean slate. And I will.
While there is so much I would like to share and comment on this book, I know it is impossible. So let me just wrap up this post by sharing the following series of quotes which followed Walsch’s expression of feelings of inadequacy in terms of providing for his children. God is quoted as saying, “Your job is to render them independent […] for you are no blessing to them as long as they are dependent on you in order to survive.[…] Let your love propel your beloved into the world—and into the full experience of who they are. In this will you have truly loved.”
Then begins the following series of statements:
In the same sense, God’s greatest moment is the moment you realize you need no God.
A true Master is not the one with the most students, but one who creates the most Masters.
A true leader is not the one with the most followers, but one who creates the most leaders.
A true teacher in not the one with the most knowledge, but one who causes the most other to have knowledge.
And a true God is not One with the most servants, but One who serves the most, thereby making Gods of all others.
Food for thought, isn't it?
If I had to choose one major actionable insight from Conversations with God, before rereading it afresh, I would have to say it is “What would love do now?” as a guiding question to answer most decisions we are faced with.
To better understand this question, I probably need to explain that it is premised on another key idea from the book, namely that everything we do is motivated either by love or fear. (Note, this is very similar to what the Course in Miracles has to say, the main difference being that in the Course in Miracles it is written that only love is real; meaning that only acts of love are lasting and thus real. The inference then is that we have a choice at all times - do anything we do out of love or from a place without love…).
Another five word powerhouse (like 'the content of their character')... “What would love do now?”
While I do not remember to use it often enough as a prologue to action, nor has it become a reflex, when I have applied it, it has been quite powerful.
One of the rare times I do think of it is when I have a potentially disagreeable e-mail to write to write to someone who has ticked me off. Instead of writing what I would have spontaneously written (a more or less poetic and subtle version of ‘screw you’) I try to reframe my attitude and say, ok, what would love do now? I try to find a feeling of love, caring and compassion for the person in question and then I write my e-mail. Sometimes it works well for me and sometimes it doesn’t (usually when my ego says ‘go ahead, give ‘em a kick in the balls, you know you want to…’ or something to that effect). But I try, and when it works, it feels really, really, good and it works wonders.
If you do apply it, let me know how it works for you.
Another incredible insight, from the beginning of the first book has to do with Joy, Truth and Love. According to Walsch, according to God, These three are interchangeable, and one always leads to the other. It matters not in which order they are placed. The Highest Thought is always the thought which contains joy. The Clearest Words are those words which contain truth. The Grandest Feeling is that feeling which you call love.
Just the first book covers so many topics that no blog entry could ever do them or the book justice. Values, morals, creativity, sexuality, finding your own way, free will, religion, finding your own way, being happy, desire, gratitude, what God is not, what religion is not, what prayer is not, what you are not, and on it goes. The subtitle of the books is ‘An uncommon dialogue” and it really is.
Trying to skip through the book to find nuggets to report back to you I realized I so marked up the book that there is hardly a page without underlining, stars, exclamation points, comments, notes to self… and I realized I want to reread it from start to finish again from a clean slate. And I will.
While there is so much I would like to share and comment on this book, I know it is impossible. So let me just wrap up this post by sharing the following series of quotes which followed Walsch’s expression of feelings of inadequacy in terms of providing for his children. God is quoted as saying, “Your job is to render them independent […] for you are no blessing to them as long as they are dependent on you in order to survive.[…] Let your love propel your beloved into the world—and into the full experience of who they are. In this will you have truly loved.”
Then begins the following series of statements:
In the same sense, God’s greatest moment is the moment you realize you need no God.
A true Master is not the one with the most students, but one who creates the most Masters.
A true leader is not the one with the most followers, but one who creates the most leaders.
A true teacher in not the one with the most knowledge, but one who causes the most other to have knowledge.
And a true God is not One with the most servants, but One who serves the most, thereby making Gods of all others.
Food for thought, isn't it?
Monday, January 26, 2009
[Joy, Truth and Love] Thoughts on Conversations with God
One series of books that I was truly surprised to enjoy reading, and continues to be a source of wonderful insights for me, is Neale Donald Walsch’s Conversations with God. I have a feeling that is has gone too far in the commercial realm, with a movie adaptation (which I have not seen), workbooks and too many sequels. But I did read the first three ‘Conversations’ and especially appreciated the first two.
The basic premise of the books is another example of scriba deus (a scribe of God, like Dante was purported to have seen himself as a scriba Dei, a scribe of gods...), i.e. Neale wrote questions to God on a notepad and felt that God began to answer him. His books are the result of the 'dictation' he took down over the years (same story by the way for the origin of the Course in Miracles).
If you are not open to spiritual issues (yet), it could seem like a lot to digest, but it is one of those books that you can read slowly, bit by bit, 15 minutes a day, while reading other books. Chewing on it in small bits will probably help to really ‘get’ the different ideas, of which there are many. Also, I would suggest getting beyond the skepticism in regards to the form in order to test the content based on your own internal bullshit detector. Do the ideas make sense? Would you be a better person and would your life be better if you applied them? Regardless of what you might think of the how, it is hard to be skeptical about the what of these books…
An interesting insight about communication appears early in book 1. This is not even from the realm of the spiritual but an insight on human understanding. Here I am quoting Walsch who is quoting God:
When we try to speak to each other—Me to you, you to Me, we are immediately constricted by the unbelievable limitation of words. For this reason, I do not communicate by words alone. In fact, rarely do I do so. My most common form of communication is through feeling. Feeling is the language of the soul.
If you want to know what’s true about something, look to how you’re feeling about it. Feelings are sometimes difficult to discover—and often even more difficult to acknowledge. Yet hidden in your deepest feelings is your highest truth. […]
I also communicate with thought. Thought and feelings are not the same, although they can occur at the same time. In communicating with thought, I often use images and pictures. For this reason, thoughts are more effective than mere words as tools of communication.
In addition to feelings and thoughts, I also use the vehicle of experience as a grand communicator.
And finally, when feelings and thoughts and experience all fail, I use words. Words are really the least effective communicator. They are most open to misinterpretation, most often misunderstood.
And why is that? It is because of what words are. Words are merely utterances: noises that stand for feelings, thoughts, and experience. They are symbols. Signs. Insignias. They are not Truth. They are not the real thing. Words may help you understand something. Experience allows you to know. Yet there are some things you cannot experience. So I have given you other tools of knowing. And these are called feelings. And so too, thoughts.
Now the supreme irony here is that you have all placed so much importance on the Word of God, and so little on the experience. In fact, you place so little value on experience that when what you experience of God differs from what you’ve heard of God, you automatically discard the experience and own the words, when it should be just the other way around.
Another irony is me writing a blog in which I quote a phrase like "when feelings and thoughts and experience all fail, I use words." Then again, that is probably why I need to write about these topics...
(to be continued - I will finish this post tomorrow)
Friday, January 23, 2009
[Thoughts on]The Five Languages of Love
A recurrent theme in my life is the way some books really have an eerie, I would say mystical, way of showing up and demanding to be read. One of the more recent and strange of these occurrences happened to me in regards to The Five Love Languages for Singles by Gary Chapman (which apparently has been updated to a 2009 version). I call it eerie because 1/I have no idea how it got into my bookshelf since I do not recall buying it or receiving it as a gift and 2/because of the way I stumbled upon it.
To make a short story longer, I was working on a paper recently for my doctorate and as usual this inspired me to do things I don't usually do. So I had Larry King of CNN on in the background and someone on the show mentions the book in question. About an hour later, as part of my usual procrastination routine that kicks in when faced with a paper, I decided that I really should rearrange that top shelf in my bookcase and dust off those poor books I rarely visit. I have reserved the top shelf for textbooks because I so rarely use them and I don't have the heart to throw/give them away (since they cost a fortune and maybe one imaginary day I will need them and regret their absence...). Anyway, I climb onto a chair, climb up to the shelf in question, which I must admit really did need dusting, and start to organize the books. As I take one of the fatter books out to dust I discover a book behind the books. Well, you have probably guessed by now, it was the Five Languages of Love. How it climbed onto the top of my bookshelf, into the reference book section, how it managed to sneak behind the biggest book on the shelf, and why it decided to bite my hand on that day I do not know. Synchronicity? I don't know, but, call me crazy, I decided to take this as a sign from the Universe that I was supposed to read this book...
So I read the book I did and I must say that I was not overwhelmed by the writing. It is not extremely well-written, or rather it is written simply with a rather not-too-subtle Christian prudishness. This is natural since Dr. Chapman is not just a marriage counselorbut also a pastor at a Baptist church. However, some books say nearly all they need to say in the title, and this one gets pretty close.
The basic tenet of this book, which is a follow up on a similar book for couples that sold 4 million copies, is that there are (you will never guess) Five Languages of Love which are:
And to complicate things further, beyond the primary language which changes, each of us has our own mix of a primary love language and dialects that vary in order of importance.
The author's insight is thus that good communication, loving communication - not just in couples but also with family and friends - means being aware of both your own primary love language/s and those of others.
After having thought about the author's list for a bit, searching for a common denominator, I reworked the list with my own terms. Here goes:
The wonderful insight here is that once this is known and understood, it makes expressing love in the other person's terms that much easier. Plus, it is a clear reminder that love requires expression, to a stronger or a lesser degree, on all five fronts.
It also explains a lot of frustration among couples. Imagine someone who is a quality time person with someone who is a gift giver. The first does not appreciate fully any gifts that are given without time spent together, and the second will not fully appreciate time spent together without a token of affection in the form of a gift. Anyway, it is not too difficult to imagine all the crazy combinations of couples who do not have the same primary love language and the feelings of frustration and lack of fulfillment this can engender.
The tragic side of it though is that we can easily feel unloved vis a vis a person who thinks that they are screaming out their love and expressing it daily. Imagine all the people...
The book itself is rather simple, with some cute stories and basic exercises along the traditions of the modern self-help book, but the core tenets alone and the awareneess that it creates to self and to others makes it worth the price and the time and climbing up to your highest dusty bookshelf to find it and read it...
To make a short story longer, I was working on a paper recently for my doctorate and as usual this inspired me to do things I don't usually do. So I had Larry King of CNN on in the background and someone on the show mentions the book in question. About an hour later, as part of my usual procrastination routine that kicks in when faced with a paper, I decided that I really should rearrange that top shelf in my bookcase and dust off those poor books I rarely visit. I have reserved the top shelf for textbooks because I so rarely use them and I don't have the heart to throw/give them away (since they cost a fortune and maybe one imaginary day I will need them and regret their absence...). Anyway, I climb onto a chair, climb up to the shelf in question, which I must admit really did need dusting, and start to organize the books. As I take one of the fatter books out to dust I discover a book behind the books. Well, you have probably guessed by now, it was the Five Languages of Love. How it climbed onto the top of my bookshelf, into the reference book section, how it managed to sneak behind the biggest book on the shelf, and why it decided to bite my hand on that day I do not know. Synchronicity? I don't know, but, call me crazy, I decided to take this as a sign from the Universe that I was supposed to read this book...
So I read the book I did and I must say that I was not overwhelmed by the writing. It is not extremely well-written, or rather it is written simply with a rather not-too-subtle Christian prudishness. This is natural since Dr. Chapman is not just a marriage counselorbut also a pastor at a Baptist church. However, some books say nearly all they need to say in the title, and this one gets pretty close.
The basic tenet of this book, which is a follow up on a similar book for couples that sold 4 million copies, is that there are (you will never guess) Five Languages of Love which are:
- Words of affirmation
- Gifts
- Acts of service
- Quality time
- Physical touch
And to complicate things further, beyond the primary language which changes, each of us has our own mix of a primary love language and dialects that vary in order of importance.
The author's insight is thus that good communication, loving communication - not just in couples but also with family and friends - means being aware of both your own primary love language/s and those of others.
After having thought about the author's list for a bit, searching for a common denominator, I reworked the list with my own terms. Here goes:
- verbal giving
- material giving
- acts of giving
- time giving
- physical giving
The wonderful insight here is that once this is known and understood, it makes expressing love in the other person's terms that much easier. Plus, it is a clear reminder that love requires expression, to a stronger or a lesser degree, on all five fronts.
It also explains a lot of frustration among couples. Imagine someone who is a quality time person with someone who is a gift giver. The first does not appreciate fully any gifts that are given without time spent together, and the second will not fully appreciate time spent together without a token of affection in the form of a gift. Anyway, it is not too difficult to imagine all the crazy combinations of couples who do not have the same primary love language and the feelings of frustration and lack of fulfillment this can engender.
The tragic side of it though is that we can easily feel unloved vis a vis a person who thinks that they are screaming out their love and expressing it daily. Imagine all the people...
The book itself is rather simple, with some cute stories and basic exercises along the traditions of the modern self-help book, but the core tenets alone and the awareneess that it creates to self and to others makes it worth the price and the time and climbing up to your highest dusty bookshelf to find it and read it...
Thursday, January 22, 2009
[Thoughts on] MLK's I Have a Dream speech
A friend of mine wrote me as a response to this blog that she is interested in reading about Martin Luther King and reading more of his writings. I have only read his historic I Have A Dream speech (which you can read in its entirety by clicking on the link) which he delivered in Washington in August of 1963.
Because she asked me about it, and also thanks to Obama's references to the man and his words in his inaugural speech, I started to think about the original speech again and what I thought about it the last time I read it (the first time I read it was in elementary school, I believe, but I didn't remember much about it).
There are many incredible passages, inspiring, wise and poetic phrases throughout the speech, but to me there is one phrase that just sticks in my mind and still awes me. Dr. King says this phrase after the fourth of his "I have a dream" statements and it goes:
I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.
If you are a parent, especially the parent of a minority, it is clear that you don't want your children judged by the color of their skin, or their religion, or their sexual orientation, or I don't know what. We could also make the question even more personal and ask what we might want to be judged by? Would it be our actions, intentions, charitable acts, contributions, by how the lives of others would be in your absence (like in Capra's It's a Wonderful Life), by the love we have given or received, by how many friends we have, I don't know actually, probably I would prefer not to be judged.
'by the content of their character'! How brilliant is that?! I am not even sure what it means but at the same time I soooo know what it means and it is incredibly clear. Everything that makes us who we are and how we act - in general and in regards to others; five words to rule them all: the content of our characters.
An admirable man, an admirable legacy...
PS. If you do know of a good book by or on Dr. Martin Luther King please let me know - maybe you could even comment directly to this post and thus share it directly with my intellectually curious friend.
Because she asked me about it, and also thanks to Obama's references to the man and his words in his inaugural speech, I started to think about the original speech again and what I thought about it the last time I read it (the first time I read it was in elementary school, I believe, but I didn't remember much about it).
There are many incredible passages, inspiring, wise and poetic phrases throughout the speech, but to me there is one phrase that just sticks in my mind and still awes me. Dr. King says this phrase after the fourth of his "I have a dream" statements and it goes:
I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.
If you are a parent, especially the parent of a minority, it is clear that you don't want your children judged by the color of their skin, or their religion, or their sexual orientation, or I don't know what. We could also make the question even more personal and ask what we might want to be judged by? Would it be our actions, intentions, charitable acts, contributions, by how the lives of others would be in your absence (like in Capra's It's a Wonderful Life), by the love we have given or received, by how many friends we have, I don't know actually, probably I would prefer not to be judged.
'by the content of their character'! How brilliant is that?! I am not even sure what it means but at the same time I soooo know what it means and it is incredibly clear. Everything that makes us who we are and how we act - in general and in regards to others; five words to rule them all: the content of our characters.
An admirable man, an admirable legacy...
PS. If you do know of a good book by or on Dr. Martin Luther King please let me know - maybe you could even comment directly to this post and thus share it directly with my intellectually curious friend.
Tuesday, January 20, 2009
the book that got me going
An openness to spirituality came to me by small steps. Or rather the wall of skepticism I had built concerning spiritual matters and all things spiritual fell brick by brick until one day it just toppled over. And the best part of it now is that I even know the book that gave me the push. I could have even told you the date, since I always jot down in books the date in which I read them, but I have lent the book out to someone and it has not yet come back...
The story of how the book found me, and books often seem to have that ability, is as good as the book. A dear friend of mine in Israel fell into a deep depression just after getting married. My attempts to talk to him from Paris were thwarted as he did not want to talk to anyone and his fresh wife was transformed into the role of gatekeeper. I had really only met his wife on a couple of occasions and had no idea how she would be able to cope. I had no news for some time until at one point she wrote me an e-mail to tell me that he was doing better and that a friend of hers was coming to Paris to live for a while and that she was sending me a present from her with her friend. To this day I have no rational explanation as to why she decided to send me a present and why she would send me that book. I later learned that she is someone who is into spirituality, but really I hardly knew her and she knew even less about me. But send it she did and the arrow hit the bulls eye - the right book at the right time.
Anyway, the book in question is Many Lives, Many Masters by Brian Weiss MD. The author was head of the psychiatry department at Mount Sinai Medical Center in Miami Beach and had a rational-scientific-empirical approach to life (kind of like mine at one point) until he started working with hypnosis with his patients. The author shares his own story of being a skeptic, of being overly rational, of having had to wait several years before having the courage to come out and tell his story for fear of being ridiculed in his profession and about his 'spiritual coming out'. While our stories weren't perfectly parallel, I felt like I was reading someone who was telling a spiritual tale despite his rational self, and that struck a chord from the beginning.
So about the book. The book is mostly the story of his experiences with one patient, Catherine, who he attempts to treat for many phobias, fears and personal problems through regression hypnosis. The idea is to take the person back in time through hypnosis to earlier traumas that they may have suppressed from their conscience. Although he found traumas, many of her phobias persisted and he kept regressing until one day she was talking to him differently and describing a different time and place. It took him a while but he understood that she was in a past life. The book goes over the different past lives and how each was linked to a health problem of phobia. In one life, Catherine was a soldier and was killed by a sword through her throat. After the hypnotic session in which she told the story her chronic sore throat cleared up.
The stories themselves are interesting but to me the most interesting was the occasional regression that went to a kind of waiting station between lives in which Catherine, under hypnosis, tells the Doctor/author that there is someone there who wants to talk to him. There begins a series of dialogues between the Doctor/author and those that identify themselves as Masters (thus the title of the book). The Masters at first distill spiritual wisdom that is intended to help the Doctor help his patient and then becomes more general spiritual wisdom. Apparently each Master spoke differently, which was manifested by Catherine (always in a hypnotic trance) speaking or acting slightly differently (channeling, although the author doesn't use that term). It was first the situation, then the author's background and finally the words of the Masters that somehow broke down my resistance and I found myself asking myself "what if?" What if this was not ridiculous, what if it was real? I then turned the question around, made it more personal, and reread the words of the Masters. My thinking was then something like 'if I did believe this was true, and lived by these words/precepts, would my life be worse or better?'
For those who know me, you know that I write all over my books and underline the best parts. Normally I would have shared a few quotes, probably from the Masters, but it looks like I will have to buy the book again, unless the person I lent it to is reading this blog and would like to give it back : )
As for the answer to my 'question to self', well if you are reading this, you know the answer. And Brian Weiss, his book and my friend's wife who sent it to me started my own spiritual ball rolling, a ball that hopefully will roll for a long time and gather no moss...
The story of how the book found me, and books often seem to have that ability, is as good as the book. A dear friend of mine in Israel fell into a deep depression just after getting married. My attempts to talk to him from Paris were thwarted as he did not want to talk to anyone and his fresh wife was transformed into the role of gatekeeper. I had really only met his wife on a couple of occasions and had no idea how she would be able to cope. I had no news for some time until at one point she wrote me an e-mail to tell me that he was doing better and that a friend of hers was coming to Paris to live for a while and that she was sending me a present from her with her friend. To this day I have no rational explanation as to why she decided to send me a present and why she would send me that book. I later learned that she is someone who is into spirituality, but really I hardly knew her and she knew even less about me. But send it she did and the arrow hit the bulls eye - the right book at the right time.
Anyway, the book in question is Many Lives, Many Masters by Brian Weiss MD. The author was head of the psychiatry department at Mount Sinai Medical Center in Miami Beach and had a rational-scientific-empirical approach to life (kind of like mine at one point) until he started working with hypnosis with his patients. The author shares his own story of being a skeptic, of being overly rational, of having had to wait several years before having the courage to come out and tell his story for fear of being ridiculed in his profession and about his 'spiritual coming out'. While our stories weren't perfectly parallel, I felt like I was reading someone who was telling a spiritual tale despite his rational self, and that struck a chord from the beginning.
So about the book. The book is mostly the story of his experiences with one patient, Catherine, who he attempts to treat for many phobias, fears and personal problems through regression hypnosis. The idea is to take the person back in time through hypnosis to earlier traumas that they may have suppressed from their conscience. Although he found traumas, many of her phobias persisted and he kept regressing until one day she was talking to him differently and describing a different time and place. It took him a while but he understood that she was in a past life. The book goes over the different past lives and how each was linked to a health problem of phobia. In one life, Catherine was a soldier and was killed by a sword through her throat. After the hypnotic session in which she told the story her chronic sore throat cleared up.
The stories themselves are interesting but to me the most interesting was the occasional regression that went to a kind of waiting station between lives in which Catherine, under hypnosis, tells the Doctor/author that there is someone there who wants to talk to him. There begins a series of dialogues between the Doctor/author and those that identify themselves as Masters (thus the title of the book). The Masters at first distill spiritual wisdom that is intended to help the Doctor help his patient and then becomes more general spiritual wisdom. Apparently each Master spoke differently, which was manifested by Catherine (always in a hypnotic trance) speaking or acting slightly differently (channeling, although the author doesn't use that term). It was first the situation, then the author's background and finally the words of the Masters that somehow broke down my resistance and I found myself asking myself "what if?" What if this was not ridiculous, what if it was real? I then turned the question around, made it more personal, and reread the words of the Masters. My thinking was then something like 'if I did believe this was true, and lived by these words/precepts, would my life be worse or better?'
For those who know me, you know that I write all over my books and underline the best parts. Normally I would have shared a few quotes, probably from the Masters, but it looks like I will have to buy the book again, unless the person I lent it to is reading this blog and would like to give it back : )
As for the answer to my 'question to self', well if you are reading this, you know the answer. And Brian Weiss, his book and my friend's wife who sent it to me started my own spiritual ball rolling, a ball that hopefully will roll for a long time and gather no moss...
Monday, January 19, 2009
[From I Am That] Nisargadatta on pleasure pain and growth
After opening the book to a random page and reading some passage that I underlined in the past, here are a few thoughts from I Am That by Nisargadatta Maharaj on pleasure, pain and understanding that I think are worth sharing. Excerpts from pages 305-306
Maharaj: It is the I-am-the-body idea that is so calamitous. It blinds you completely to your real nature. Even for a moment do not think that you are body. Give yourself no name, no shape. In the darkness and the silence reality is found.
[...]
Questioner: Must we not suffer to grow?
Maharaj: It is enough to know that there is suffering. That the world suffers. By themselves neither pleasure nor pain enlighten. Only understanding does. Once you have grasped the truth that the world is full of suffering, that to be born is a calamity, you will find the urge and the energy to go beyond it. Pleasure puts you to sleep and pain wakes you up. If you do not want to suffer don't go to sleep. You cannot know yourself through bliss alone, for bliss is your very nature. You must face the opposite, what you are not, to find enlightenment.
Before I share some of my thoughts on the above, for those who are not familiar with Nisargadatta (an Indian petty merchant turned spiritual teacher after he was enlightened), when he says 'to be born is a calamity', he (probably) means that to think that you are a body that is born and dies (i.e. identifying with the body) is the calamity.
As regards the above text it makes me think that we totally underestimate the importance of depression, loneliness, mid-life crises, downs, the blues, growing pains, losing a loved one, unemployment, heart breaks, loss of health and generally all of life's down periods. 'Pain wakes you up'...It is only during these periods that we find ourselves asking ourselves deep questions, the deepest questions and struggle with the answers. It is also the only times we really consider significant change and/or act on it. The good times are great, but we just surf on the good times, which is probably important to do too, as that is akin to being in the moment. But we probably need to balance that with introspection, soul-searching, tough questions and the like; and human nature is such that we usually only do that (at least for more than a few minutes) when we are forced to. The periods in which we have the blues are a true occasion for change, progress, understanding... My own experience seems to corraborate that. While I like to think that I am smarter than that and can learn to shave on others' beards, it turns out that I amn't. Nope I needed to pay the dues to figure out even the basics, which I am still working on (they always need work...).
It is ironic that Maharaj tells us that if we don't want to suffer, don't go to sleep. Since sleep is what we usually want to do most when we are suffering from the blues. Obviously he means going to sleep in a metaphysical sense, which is what he claims most of humanity has chosen - sleep over awakening. Metaphysical awakening, to our true natures - which to him is bliss, understanding we are one with the Universe - will help us to understand that there is no suffering.
The final idea though is what strikes me the most: 'You must face the opposite, what you are not, to find enlightenment.' As if we have all chosen sleep and suffering in order to find our way back to our true natures. Some kind of metaphysical game of hide and go seek?
Maharaj: It is the I-am-the-body idea that is so calamitous. It blinds you completely to your real nature. Even for a moment do not think that you are body. Give yourself no name, no shape. In the darkness and the silence reality is found.
[...]
Questioner: Must we not suffer to grow?
Maharaj: It is enough to know that there is suffering. That the world suffers. By themselves neither pleasure nor pain enlighten. Only understanding does. Once you have grasped the truth that the world is full of suffering, that to be born is a calamity, you will find the urge and the energy to go beyond it. Pleasure puts you to sleep and pain wakes you up. If you do not want to suffer don't go to sleep. You cannot know yourself through bliss alone, for bliss is your very nature. You must face the opposite, what you are not, to find enlightenment.
Before I share some of my thoughts on the above, for those who are not familiar with Nisargadatta (an Indian petty merchant turned spiritual teacher after he was enlightened), when he says 'to be born is a calamity', he (probably) means that to think that you are a body that is born and dies (i.e. identifying with the body) is the calamity.
As regards the above text it makes me think that we totally underestimate the importance of depression, loneliness, mid-life crises, downs, the blues, growing pains, losing a loved one, unemployment, heart breaks, loss of health and generally all of life's down periods. 'Pain wakes you up'...It is only during these periods that we find ourselves asking ourselves deep questions, the deepest questions and struggle with the answers. It is also the only times we really consider significant change and/or act on it. The good times are great, but we just surf on the good times, which is probably important to do too, as that is akin to being in the moment. But we probably need to balance that with introspection, soul-searching, tough questions and the like; and human nature is such that we usually only do that (at least for more than a few minutes) when we are forced to. The periods in which we have the blues are a true occasion for change, progress, understanding... My own experience seems to corraborate that. While I like to think that I am smarter than that and can learn to shave on others' beards, it turns out that I amn't. Nope I needed to pay the dues to figure out even the basics, which I am still working on (they always need work...).
It is ironic that Maharaj tells us that if we don't want to suffer, don't go to sleep. Since sleep is what we usually want to do most when we are suffering from the blues. Obviously he means going to sleep in a metaphysical sense, which is what he claims most of humanity has chosen - sleep over awakening. Metaphysical awakening, to our true natures - which to him is bliss, understanding we are one with the Universe - will help us to understand that there is no suffering.
The final idea though is what strikes me the most: 'You must face the opposite, what you are not, to find enlightenment.' As if we have all chosen sleep and suffering in order to find our way back to our true natures. Some kind of metaphysical game of hide and go seek?
Now reading Deepak Chopra The Path to Love
This book was given to me as a present. The best part was that it was a book that was already read by the person who gave it to me and included the notes. Always fun to share someone else's insights and thoughts and a generous present - sharing the book and the insights!
As for the book, I must admit that I always liked Deepak Chopra (he is a likeable guy) but was never too impressed. I always thought of him as a purveyor of spirituality for the masses and held my prejudice of shallowness against him. Then I read an interview of him in What is Enlightenment magazine (now called Enlighten Next). I realized that this was his chosen mission and I realized that he was pretty darn good at it. That allowed me to approach this book with more of an open mind.
The book starts well, especially since any author who quotes Nisargadatta Maharaj is an author worth reading, and Deepak quotes him early on:
"Life is love and love is life. What keeps the body together but love? What is desire but love of the self?... And what is knowledge but love of truth?
The means and form may be wrong, but the motive behind is always love--love of the me and mine. The me and the mine may be small, or may explode and embrace the Universe, but love remains."
This is a pretty incredible insight! We are all egotistical, i.e. protective of the "me and mine". HOWEVER, for the more spiritually evolved this "me and mine" encompasses more than the narrowest sense (e.g. materialistic collectibles) and can evolve to include family, friends, colleagues, the other and, ultimately, even the entire Universe.
Not easy to do, but a nifty trick if you can pull it off...
If you haven't read Nisargadatta's I Am That, it is highly recommended and I will undoubtedly comment on different passages of that book which is a treasure trove of spiritual nuggets and insights. Put it on your reading list and then on your bedside table. And then read it (osmosis can only take you so far : ))
As for the book, I must admit that I always liked Deepak Chopra (he is a likeable guy) but was never too impressed. I always thought of him as a purveyor of spirituality for the masses and held my prejudice of shallowness against him. Then I read an interview of him in What is Enlightenment magazine (now called Enlighten Next). I realized that this was his chosen mission and I realized that he was pretty darn good at it. That allowed me to approach this book with more of an open mind.
The book starts well, especially since any author who quotes Nisargadatta Maharaj is an author worth reading, and Deepak quotes him early on:
"Life is love and love is life. What keeps the body together but love? What is desire but love of the self?... And what is knowledge but love of truth?
The means and form may be wrong, but the motive behind is always love--love of the me and mine. The me and the mine may be small, or may explode and embrace the Universe, but love remains."
This is a pretty incredible insight! We are all egotistical, i.e. protective of the "me and mine". HOWEVER, for the more spiritually evolved this "me and mine" encompasses more than the narrowest sense (e.g. materialistic collectibles) and can evolve to include family, friends, colleagues, the other and, ultimately, even the entire Universe.
Not easy to do, but a nifty trick if you can pull it off...
If you haven't read Nisargadatta's I Am That, it is highly recommended and I will undoubtedly comment on different passages of that book which is a treasure trove of spiritual nuggets and insights. Put it on your reading list and then on your bedside table. And then read it (osmosis can only take you so far : ))
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)