National service

I have often thought how glad I am that national service was stopped way before my time. PE and games at school were bad enough! How would national service have gone? The passive resistance I had employed in those school PE and games 'lessons' would probably not have worked. Of course it may be that they would have spotted what a thoroughly hopeless case I was and sent me off to whatever it was they did with small sensitive repressed outsiders who showed no sporting or rough play interests and yet also lacked theatrical inclinations. Yes, they may have decided that I had better get theatrical! Or maybe I would have decided that. Alternatively of course they might have spotted the practical, capable engineer and the strong character. And here is the point; this fantasy of incompetence painted first needs to be offset against alternative views including the practicality noted here. There is much physiological baggage for me in all this and it seems to be spread about under various headings in my physiological database. I might throw some headings away then find the same stuff under other headings. Actually I have just been throwing out old files today (real paper ones) from degree courses, training courses and work. All (hopefully) redundant; they have served their purpose and like any raft once at the shore... But I digress, I want to run with this national service stuff for a bit. Upon reflection I doubt I would have been able / allowed to find some place of retreat.

I understand that the military like to get their men beyond their own ego's and working together as a team; all for one and one for all. I would have struggled! Which posses interesting questions about self and Self. And, the deliberately chosen their men points to interesting questions about constructions of masculinities and thus femininities; hegemony. I do not leave out their women although I can hear my feminist friends saying 'oh yes you do; you bring them in second and by association'. I try in these few lines to acknowledge the gender politics and by now the issues should be clear but for clarity I'll list them; construction of masculinity and its part in self, hegemony, subjugation of self by the state by employing group-think and the role of Self in 'seeing' this. This point about the state is slightly different from the hegemonic creation of self, I am thinking more of the inhumanities of war. I am going to shy away from construction femininity as it is just too off radar for me, but I acknowledge the yin principle.

Now, I opened this post with baggage and that's boring; the raft has sailed on, bits of it get reinvented etc. So, rather than pick away at the particulars I'll point just to this- one's historical self is tightly tied into one's environment and I am thankful not to have had to deal with the military.


Oh, and returning to throwing things out, I started up my old computer from 1995; It has been stored away awaiting disposal and we plan to try to freecycle it. It still works complete with Windows 3.11! DC joked as we set it up that it was like starting a time machine! Fortunately we had no flux capacitor!

Humour

Humour is as they say the best medicine. And for me if it is the somewhat surreal variety as most excellently created by the thoroughly imaginative Vic Reeves and Bob Mortimer then all the better. I've just watched a review of the pair's Shooting stars; quite brilliant. I had forgotten this gem. Humour is often said to be based on some form of cruelty at bottom. Well the but of the joke in the case of Vic and Bob is our own pretentiousness. We can see this in the treatment given to any celebrity who takes part in the show; any egotism would be thrashed. There is nothing like the (probably typically British) surreal antics of this pair to bring me to earth, aliveness and a sense of the greatness of sharing time with fun people and to remember my own inner clown. Ah but with the passing of the years... We all slow down; the energy is just less vibrant or at least the pace of it slows. But the vibrancy can still remain; think of Humphrey Lyttelton or George Melley, they were both right in there living as full as they could until their deaths. The inner clown need not fade away and it need not be part of the closed armour of the adapted self, the circus clown complete with tears. No, the inner child is the playfulness here and the tears need only be of laughter.

Reminder to self- when the short, dark and cloudy days dampen the mood get some humour going David.

What am I doing

How much do/can we change? And when did we become the way we are? I am trying to be as much as I might be. Not as much as I can do, not tick off achievements. No, as open and aware of my position as I can be. And this is about freedom and aliveness. So I have to spot the habits that are not helpful and drop them. Except I can't just drop them; I need to move to more skillful alternatives. I have heard DC say on more than one occasion that we don't change we just get more the same. Umm. That might be the difference between a life with or without a spiritual practice; to take (goalless) aim at Self or just plough on with self. And there is the hard bit; I have my historic self, my karma and that is my starting point for any (aim to) move forward. I can only do what I can do. I think that to say I can only be what I am requires that I consider the (philosophical) question of being. I am trying to be as much as I might be so I consider the question. The way I put this to myself at the moment is 'what am I doing? Is this what needs to be done?' The need bit is where the question expands hugely into what I understand, believe want etc. It would start to get circular without some external input. Fortunately life comes along and makes demands and tai chi, reading Buddhist text and sitting zazen all provide new input.

I started this post yesterday but I couldn't get it to gel so I left it at the above paragraph. Then I came across one of DC's books on consciousness by Susan Blackmore. (DC has been looking at consciousness for sometime now and is pulling together various papers, books and conferences on the subject from a music perspective.) Blackmore lectured in psychology and has practiced meditation since the 1980's so I was interested to see the book. I read with interest the last two chapters; Meditation and mindfulness and Buddhism and consciousness. Ah, I thought; will she look at bridging the Eastern spiritual traditions and Western scientific method? Will Western psychology be compared and contrasted with Buddhism. Will the question of reality be investigated? Will she have a view on the significance of enlightenment experiences? I don't like voicing that last question, at least not as such; it seems so crude. Any way, yes, those questions are raised. There is of course no grand unifying theory pulling this little lot into the answer of course. No, we each have to do that for our selves I suppose. And here Blackmore gives a useful reminder- Zen requires 'great doubt'. Ah yes; get perplexed and keep asking, keep waking up. Now I've got the post to gel and yes I had the right title I just forgot the right expectation; I forgot that it's not about getting it all to gel.

Music

I quite like a bit of a bop, I quite like some music, I find some music not at all to my taste. But music has never been on my radar the way I think it is for many people; I would go for days without thinking much to play any left to my own devices. My partner DC lives it! It is a major part of his life; he is Prof. of music at a university and it runs through most if not all parts of his life.


Music changes one's mood and can move one through the chakras. I wonder weather part of the slight 'off radar' thing I have with music is that I was self conscious as a kid; the mind always watching and thus a not fully connecting. I am not suggesting that the self consciousness was the cause exactly, more that the roots of the two are close. If I just listen to music I can get a bit bored; it isn't enough. If I am doing something then I quite like the quiet so as to concentrate or enjoy the peace. The some music in the background idea kind of works for me but it is not a habit. I suppose I am a bit better with speech radio. Then there is being affected by music; it moving one through the chakras to match the rhythm, melody etc. I like that in dance but if I am not moving then I find the mind comes in and I sort of ask 'what am I up to?' Although I often have the radio on whilst driving.

I think I am pointing to the question of attention and identification. I suspect some people identify more with the music. I get this identification too but I don't think so much to reconnect with it (by choosing to play it) later on. I wonder if this is something to do with activity and passivity hence the dance connection; in the past I'v done some Biodanza and I really like that.

What I think is interesting here is the relationship between mind, body and an external stimulus and what this says about spirit, weather the music be more lower (eg Bob Marley's Jamming) or upper (Vaughan Williams' The lark ascending) chakra centred. Actually some clarification is needed here; Bob Marley's Jamming gets me moving (ie dance, creative chakra) but it also moves in the heart chakra and that points to aliveness. I guess there is some pointing to aliveness in Vaughan Williams' The lark ascending but to me this is more about the still part of being and the (un)reachable realms we can detect. I've said in the past that people might want to consider playing this at my funeral. Not that I think it a deathly piece it's just it seems to me to point onwards.

Position

A few things come to mind:

Yesterday (Christmas day) Jesus did not feature in my thoughts other than after I'd posted my blog;
DC bought me an MP3 multi media player for Christmas; amazing technology. Youths I dare say have all that stuff with them all the time and share it all with each other in a being part of it way. Or some do. I recall my somewhat disconnected youth;
Depression & the body - we are creatures of the light. I felt better today when the sun came out. Which points to that question about mind and materialism (or physicalism). Big one that!;
I have a cold, ughh.

Pulling this together I might say that one's position that is to say the basis from/of which one's reality is woven is a complex of many unknowns. But then I accepted that ages ago. So, what is there to say about it? Well, I guess it's that materialism question. Yes, there is no archimedian point, but that only seems to show the unanswerable nature of the problem. Do I doubt Buddha nature? Naa, it's just what it might (not) mean.

A bit down

I am a bit down. Reasons? Well, the dark days don't help although I am not overtly bothered by that, being upset with DC and feeling that I don't have sufficient time to study Buddhist philosophy are in there for sure. But practice is not study. Formal zazen and trying to follow the precepts are probably of more use to me. I've probably got the theory. Piling up concepts etc... So, what is feeling down about? And what is feeling down? Thoughts, physical feelings and... Umm...? Not easy this rooting out attachments. I guess that's what it boils down to. Is it that my self feels it's not having enough fun and neither is it progressing towards Self (how ridiculous is that) and so is thwarted in it's efforts to get what it thinks it wants? And who is it that is positing this idea? And am I a convinced Buddhist? Am I still looking to escape pain by taking control?

Hold up, rewind, UPSET WITH DC. Yes, that's the biggest part of it. We have been together for going on seventeen years, we love each other. I got angry and I can't quite work out fully why and I don't like that I felt that way. And this clearly isn't about anything he has done. Is this about how I feel about me? Have I got stuck in some me-ness? I don't quite know?

Oh, it will pass. All is well.

Anxiety

Talk this evening with friends came around to the subject of extended periods of traveling the world alone. This never appealed to me as it does to some people and I am impressed by the resilience of those young people who do this as soon as they leave school in search of adventure. But then they probably didn't spend years battling with OCD; they probably see the world as exiting and full of wonderful opportunity. Whereas I have had to develop a more optimistic approach.

Following a web link I came across some stuff on sensitive people and in particular sensitive children. Whilst tacitly recognised for years this is now apparently an accepted taxonomy. All taxonomies of course need to be viewed with care but I feel I do fit the bill. Society tends to take a dim view of the sensitive so one grows armour which then needs to be stripped away or redeployed in a move towards accepting that one is basically alright. And so it is understandable that the prospect of heading off into the unknown in search of adventure, indeed the very word adventure, is likely to give rise in my mind to negative feelings. I am much more relaxed in this respect these days but my basic instinct is to view the unknown and in particular the uncontrolled with caution.

So, the sensitivity and the introspection may well help in the study and following of the Way but of course the fear and the control which it prompts can be obstacles. Stripping away the armour seems to help but I can see how this could turn into more control. This I think is the coal face of practice for me. I guess this is in my mind a bit now and I've been writing about it one way or an other in other posts.