Thursday, October 22, 2015

Affirming: Putting the future into words

Sutra 2.33 is one verse from the Yoga Sutra of Patanjali. Just one verse, but with powerful implications. 

vitarka baadhane pratipaksha bhaavanam

Variously translated as
When negative feelings restrict us, the opposite should be cultivated. (Alistair Shearer) 
Unwholesome thoughts can be neutralized by cultivating wholesome ones. (Chip Hartranft) 
When disturbed by negative thoughts, opposite, positive ones should be thought of.  (Sw. Satchidananda)  
Upon being harassed by negative thoughts, one should cultivate counteracting thoughts. (Edwin Bryant) 

vitarka = negative thoughts
baadhane = disturbing
pratipaksha = opposite thoughts 
bhaavanam = thinking of

One more aphorism, close in spirit to the sutra:
Think lovely thoughts. -- Tinker Bell

Oh, those thoughts that have the power to restrict, sicken, disturb, harass, and ground us.

Tinker Bell got a wonderful, almost immediate result from her strategy of thinking positive thoughts: "I'm flying!!!"

For the rest of us, the project of turning our thinking by replacing the bummers with the good things will usually take longer to give results. But it's possible.

I was in my third year of teaching, the crucial, make-or-break year, when I would either be granted tenure or be dismissed. My principal was infamous for denying tenure, just to flex administrative muscle. The pressure was on.

In a try-anything mindset, I turned to what I'd been learning about affirmations.

Affirmations, positive statements that describe a desired situation or goal, are repeated, until they get impressed at deep layers of the mind. From the subconscious, they can influence our behavior so that we're acting in alignment with our desired future. Phrase them so they're short and sweet, and include all your names.

Okay, if that could help me with Mr. Tough Administrator, it was worth a try.

I put Post-It notes in strategic spots in the house.

From this situation, only good comes to me, CKM. 
I, CKM, am safe. 
I, CKM, accept my good. 
I, CKM, love teaching, and teaching loves me. 
I, CKM, live by the Existence Principle: for every problem there exists a solution; for my situation, I have the solution.

True, that last one was a bit long. But I was inspired by the notion that this Existence Principle thing (learned about it from NPR) was one that inventors have faith in. If it could work for guys like Thomas Edison and Elias Howe, it could work for me.

When to repeat an affirmation? Whenever. While walking, a very effective time, as it’s reinforced by stepping and breathing. Whenever you start to taste the gray grit of worry. While breathing yourself to sleep, attaching the syllables to the rhythm of the breath. The words that name the future that you want -- they can be very powerful.

The other day I found one of those Post-It notes, a tattered little reminder from the past. Holding it, I remembered how much energy I'd put into repeating it. And how much work I'd put into improving every aspect of my teaching, not trusting in affirmations alone. I'll never know which proportions of which efforts bore fruit, but in the end, I was granted tenure. An immense, profound relief. Man, was I grateful.

So, I became an adherent of using affirmations, and have kept on using them to this day.

Thanks to Patanjali for the recipe.

I have a corollary sutra to offer. Until I can get an elegant, poetic, sonorous, Sanskrit version, I’ll offer up the English:
Upon being harassed by persistent worries, one should make brownies for one’s next door neighbor. 
Upon being disturbed by sinking hopes, one should go outdoors for a brisk walk-jog. 
And upon being restricted instead of uplifted, one should put on loud French-Canadian music and dance around the room.

Because marshalling the power of affirmation can be a long haul, and sometimes we all need a quick fix.

Thursday, October 8, 2015

Fear might be getting a bad rap

I first encountered yoga and yogic philosophy when I was a newly-hatched adult and pretty much un-formed person in my 20s. Human relationships were quite a mystery to me, and as the saying goes, I was not "in touch with my feelings."

For some years I misunderstood the philosophy. I thought it was offering a shortcut, a way around those mysterious and troublesome phenomena, the emotions. The solution was to ignore them, obviously, and focus on "higher truths."

It's been a long road to learn that the emotions, all of them, are an irreplaceable part of our exquisite bodymind systems.

I can understand how I misinterpreted some cues. 

For example, check out this excerpt from a primer on the chakras.
The first three chakras, starting at the base of the spine, are chakras of matter. They are more physical in nature. When we work through our physical chakras, or the first three, we can open the spiritual chakras more fully.      
First Chakra: The Muladhara is the chakra of stability, security, and our basic needs. It encompasses the first three vertebrae, the bladder, and the colon. When this chakra is open, we feel safe and fearless.  (Chopra Centered Lifestyle)

Can you see a subtle value distinction which implies that the “physical” is inferior to the “spiritual”? And a not-so-subtle statement that a person with an open first chakra will feel fearless? Without an appreciation for the roles of the emotions, writings like this one might cause us to undervalue the emotion of fear — which I’ve seen called a “base” emotion.

Actually, we’ve each came equipped, physically, mentally, emotionally, to be proactive in our own survival. Our organisms have that innate wisdom. Survival is a necessary platform from which to seek truth, peace, enlightenment, and spirituality. So, we can honor our abilities to survive.

Which brings me to the value of intuitive “feeling” and the value of fear.

There’s no better interpreter than the author Gavin De Becker. From The Gift of Fear, 1977:

Fear can save your life. It directs you to avoid that stranger, to leave the room, to call for help. The intuitive message of fear, together with rational principles, can help you to predict and thereby avoid personal violence.
Like every creature on earth, we have an extraordinary defense resource. We don’t have the sharpest claws and strongest jaws — but we do have the biggest brains, and intuition is the most impressive process of these brains. … [M]ore viscerally named a "gut feeling," but whatever name we use, it isn’t just a feeling. It is a process more extraordinary and ultimately more logical in the natural order than the most fantastic computer calculation. It is our most complex cognitive process and, at the same time, the simplest. 
Intuition connects us to the natural world and to our nature. It carries us to predictions we will later marvel at. "Somehow I knew," we will say about the chance meeting we predicted, or about the unexpected phone call from a distant friend, or the unlikely turnaround in someone’s behavior, or about the violence we steered clear of, or, too often, the danger we elected not to steer clear of.

Regarding our intuitive and emotional nature, I think the way forward is a two-part process. First feel. Then deal. 

I want to be open to intuitions of warning, to feelings of fear, for their purpose is to alert me to danger. Then, I want to be open to dealing with warning and with fear. Perhaps I should act on them. Perhaps on second look, they will prove groundless.

The principles of the yamas — the knowledge of how to relieve stress by soothing the nervous system — the inner knowing oneself that comes from yoga practice — and what we can learn by reading Gavin De Becker — all those are priceless tools for the “dealing” part of the process of honoring and working with our intuition and our feelings.

The “feeling” part is to be equally valued and honored.


Sex can be scary -- $24 billion scary

Yoga training class, making its way through the list of five yamas, precepts for ethical behavior, dwelt for a time on the concept of bramacarya, responsible behavior in the realm of sexuality. A multi-dimensional concept, stretching from the most interior realms of the individual to the broadest of implications for societies.

At the same time we were considering the topic via class discussions and homework writings, the nation as a whole was grappling with political struggles re federal funding of the non-profit organization Planned Parenthood.

Two separate issues? I've decided not. 

Laying out the pieces of the puzzle

1   The primary role of Planned Parenthood is to provide access to reproductive health care services.
The overwhelming majority of Planned Parenthood's services involve screening for and treating sexually transmitted diseases and infections, as well as providing contraception  ... [M]any of Planned Parenthood's patients are ... lower-income. As of 2012, 79 percent of people receiving services from Planned Parenthood lived at 150 percent of the federal poverty level or lower (that comes out to around $18,500 for a single adult), according to a March Government Accountability Office report. (Political News from NPR, 8/5/15)

2   Some object to the fact that Planned Parenthood's services include abortion.
3 percent of the services it provided last year were abortion-related. (Political News from NPR, 8/5/15)

3   In opposing abortion, some are opposing family planning and birth control services as well.
Re Charmaine Yoest, President and CEO of Americans United for Life: "For all her emphasis on women’s health, her end goal isn’t to make abortion safer. She wants to make the procedure illegal. She leaves no room for exceptions in the case of rape or incest or to preserve the health of the mother. She believes that embryos have legal rights and opposes birth control, like the IUD, that she thinks 'has life-ending properties.' 
"Nor does Yoest advocate for reducing abortion by increasing access to birth control. When I asked what she thought about a study, published in October, which found a 60 to 80 percent drop in the abortion rate, compared with the national average, among women in St. Louis who received free birth control for three years, she said, 'I don’t want to frustrate you, but I’m not going to go there.' She referred me to a critique of the study’s methodology in National Review. 'It’s really a red herring that the abortion lobby likes to bring up by conflating abortion and birth control,' she said when pressed on PBS last year. 'Because that would be, frankly, carrying water for the other side to allow them to redefine the issue in that way.'  (New York Times, 11/4/12) 


4   But doesn't offering birth control cut the numbers of abortions? Yes. This common-sense notion is supported by statistical study.
"Free birth control led to greatly lower rates of abortions and births to teenagers, a large study concludes, offering strong evidence for how a bitterly contested Obama administration policy could benefit women’s health. The two-year project tracked more than 9,000 women in St. Louis, many of them poor or uninsured, who were given their choice of a range of free contraceptives. These women experienced far fewer unintended pregnancies as a result, reported Dr. Jeffrey Peipert of Washington University in St. Louis in a study published Thursday.  
"There were 6.3 births per 1,000 teenagers in the study, compared with a national rate of 34 births per 1,000 teens in 2010. There also were substantially lower rates of abortion, when compared with women in the metro area and nationally: 4.4 to 7.5 abortions per 1,000 women in the study, compared with 13.4 to 17 abortions per 1,000 women in the St. Louis region, Dr. Peipert calculated. The national rate is almost 20 abortions per 1,000 women. Women’s health specialists said the study foreshadows the potential impact of the new health care law, in which millions of women are beginning to get contraceptives without a co-payment." (New York Times, 10/4/12)

5   So what is at the heart of opposing family planning services offered at Planned Parenthood? I can only conclude that some of us, possibly religious persons especially, really want to monitor sexual behavior of others of us, because disagreement about what constitutes responsible behavior apparently makes some of us very nervous.

Lutheran Pastor Nadia Bolz-Weber of Denver, Colorado, has some pointed words on the subject. "I don't monitor people's behavior, let's put it that way. So much of Christianity has become about monitoring behavior, and so far it has just failed to work as a strategy for making people better. For instance, we're in the middle of this Ashley Madison scandal with all of these clergy, so on some level Christianity became about monitoring people's behavior, like a sin-management program, and that almost always fails and often backfires. I would actually argue that conservative Christianity's obsession with controlling sexuality — I mean absolute obsession with it — has in fact created more unhealthy sexual behavior than it has ever prevented. I really believe that."  (Washington Post 11/3/13)

6   Planned Parenthood offers services to all, married and unmarried. When people access the services at Planned Parenthood, it becomes impossible to control their sexual behavior.
Students for Life President Kristan Hawkins told conservative activists last week that the real goal is to “take out Planned Parenthood.”  
In a speech to Eagle Council 2015, the annual conference held by Phyllis Schlafly’s Eagle Forum, Hawkins ... claimed that Planned Parenthood only supports sexual education and birth control in order to convince young women to have premarital sex, causing them to go to Planned Parenthood to spend money on STD tests and treatment and, eventually, abortions. 
“She’s going to start this cycle of bad decisions,” she said.
(Right Wing Watch, 9/15/15) 

7   In order to undercut Planned Parenthood, therefore, some in Congress want to cut all federal funding for the organization.
Planned Parenthood received ... $528 million [in federal funding] last year, according to Planned Parenthood's latest annual report. That totals more than 40 percent of Planned Parenthood's total $1.3 billion in revenue for the year, which suggests that the organization would be in some heavy financial trouble without that public funding. 
Title X does not allow federal funds to be used for abortions. Medicaid, however, does allow [state] government money to be spent on them — in very restricted cases. (Political News from NPR, 8/5/15)

8   And some are so adamant that they would shut down the federal government if they do not get their way. 
The House passed two abortion-related bills Friday, including one that would strip federal health-care funding from Planned Parenthood for one year, but it remains unclear whether the votes would appease conservatives who have threatened a government shutdown over the organization. (Washington Post, 9/18/15)

9   How much did the government shutdown cost last time?
The government shutdown [of 2013] has taken at least $24 billion out of the United States economy, [according to] the financial ratings agency Standard & Poor's.  (Huffington Post, 10/16/13)

Putting the above nine puzzle pieces together, we arrive at the title of this post: Sex can be scary -- $24 billion scary. We'll stay tuned . . .

Wednesday, September 23, 2015

Cause and Effect

From the beginning I’ve valued the cause and effect principles in yoga philosophy and yogic world view. A refreshing difference from an emphasis on belief, cause and effect principles simply explain the mechanics of the world. Do x and reap y.

Recently heard a lecture by Carrie Meyer on Subtle Anatomy.

Her simple statement was striking, and rings true: “To go against the yamas and niyamas creates impurities in the body-mind.”

My paraphrase: Trying to act as if the yamas and niyamas don’t apply to you, baby? You're just making your life difficult.

Worth pondering.


From Patanjali’s Yoga Sutras, the yamas 
Ahiṃsā nonviolence, non-harming other living beings
Satya
truthfulness, non-falsehood
Asteya
non-stealing, integrity
Brahmacārya
celibacy, loyalty to one's partner
Aparigraha
non-avarice, non-possessiveness, 
non-attachment


The niyamas
Śauca
simplicity, clarity of mind, speech and body
Santoṣa
contentment, acceptance of others, acceptance of one's circumstances as they are in order to get past or change them, optimism for self
Tapas
persistence and perseverance in search of the goal
Svādhyāya
study of collected wisdom, study of self, self-reflection, introspection of one's own thoughts, speech and actions
Īśvarapraṇidhāna
contemplation of and surrender to the Ishvara (God, Supreme Being, Brahman, True Self, Unchanging Reality)

• • • • •

Wednesday, September 9, 2015

No "I" in "Happy," but how about boundaries?

A sweetly written article in the Shambhala Sun (1) titled "There's No 'I' in 'Happy'" lays out the case for putting others first as the source of real happiness. I think most of us can resonate. And a clear article posted at DharmaWisdom.org (2) titled "Boundaries" advances the notion that strong personal boundaries make for more loving and caring relationships. Likewise, most of us can resonate again here. But aren't these two authors contradicting each other?

The Shambala Sun article contains these statements, which seem to imply that the more we give, without attention to limits, the happier we are:

  • Real happiness . . . would be egolessness.
  • If we help others, we will find all the happiness we want.
  • [A positive] emotional aspect of compassion is a sign of weakness in the ego . . .

Whereas the DharmaWisdom article implies that it is healthy to place limits on giving:
  • . . . you may not realize that you have the right to psychological sanctity--that it's inappropriate for others to ask certain things of you, and that you have the right to say no to them.
  • [examples of] inappropriate merging of identities [include] . . . Your spouse tells you what to think; . . . your best friend tells you who to date; . . . your boss calls you at home to ask you to do the task he has neglected.
  • Unfortunately, intimate love is often misunderstood as a merger without boundaries.
.  .  .  .  .  

When I first encountered yoga philosophy, I really thought I'd found a shortcut solution to the impossibly difficult world of human emotion and human relations. Things would be pretty simple. I would just focus on being as nice as possible, as helpful as possible, and on imitating the wonderful phrase I'd read in Gandhi: "reduce oneself to zero."

So when my husband and father of my kids was angry without explaining why, I shrugged and just tried to understand him more. Somehow. Via guesswork, I s'pose. When he became more and more angry, communicating with us less and less, I figured that he really just needed more compassion from me, along with good cooking, a clean house, and smart, educationally enriched kids. It was my role to ignore the toll all this was taking on my emotional state and of course on all the relationships in the house. So, on we stumbled for some years. Not hard to imagine that the breaking point would arrive one day, and it did.

Fortunately, that was then, and this is now. Writing from today's point of view, I look back incredulously. And send myself and all the others a good measure of compassion, aimed backward in time. For then and for now, it's important to reconcile the two points of view in the two articles referenced at the beginning of my essay. Reconcile them, or discard one.
.  .  .  .  .  

I'll have to come down in agreement with the quotes from DharmaWisdom. The three I chose above certainly offer insight into the problems with our behavior in the not-so-happy home I described. I had misunderstood Gandhi, who never actually endorsed being a doormat!

So what can the first author mean? Here is my attempt to reconcile his view to what I've learned by experience. 

"Real happiness . . . would be egolessness." Ego-fullness, on the other hand, of course means misery, if by ego we only mean the small, grasping parts of our personality which think that "more for another means less for me." If however, we define a healthy ego as a sense of self which gives and asks for respect from all concerned, then actually the healthier the ego, the greater chances for happiness.


"If we help others, we will find all the happiness we want." As I found out the hard way over some long years, it's important to aim for a win-win in relationships. Helping others must include treating ourselves fairly too. A healthy sense of self treats that self with the same high regard as others are treated.


"[A positive] emotional aspect of compassion is a sign of weakness in the ego . . ." Again, if ego is defined as purely selfish, then a strong ego would not be capable of compassion. The strongest ego would be a narcissistic one. Of course we'd want to weaken that fellow. However, the concept of personal boundaries gives the ego the role of maintaining the limits which protect the person. Healthy protection is worth strengthening, not weakening.

I'll close with one more quote from the DharmaWisdom source, because I think it's right on.

Through my own practice, I now see boundaries as being about stewardship, which means I have a responsibility for caring for this body and these mental and emotional states. If I'm a good steward, opportune conditions for both psychological development and spiritual freedom will arise, and I'll cause less suffering for myself and others. Good boundaries are not about "me" or my ego. Nor is there a feeling of "me" or "mine." Rather, there is harmony and possibility or there is not. Likewise, being a good steward means showing the same respect for the boundaries of others. (2)

I've concluded that the grasping 'I' doesn't reside in 'happy,' but good boundaries sure do.




(1) Sakyong Mipham Rinpoche, "There's No 'I' in 'Happy,'" Shambala Sun, March 2007.
(2) Phillip Moffitt, "Boundaries," DharmaWisdom.com, undated.



Tuesday, August 25, 2015

Hey, look back into the room. Maybe that wasn't an elephant all along.

As our yoga class reflects this week on satya, truth, I've been reflecting on my kidhood. The playing outdoors dimension was so great. Earliest memories are of the farm outside Chandler, Arizona, where my dad grew cotton and milo on ground leased from my grandpa: kid paradise. 

My brother and I played in the irrigation ditch -- the dry ditch, that is -- where we dug little caves and landscaped an entire world for our imaginary characters, Mousie and Rattie. (Rattie as his name suggested was the less principled of the two. Mousie was kind, with dependable integrity.) We crawled through the growing milo, making complex tunneled labyrinths where we sometimes got lost. (It was against the rules to stand up to get bearings.) And we spent hours climbing the huge-to-us cottonwood tree which grew right next to the ditch. I was sincerely infuriated that my younger brother climbed higher because he was more daring than I was. (That seemed to go against the natural order of things and my supposed superiority as two years elder.)


The being indoors dimension had its fun as well. We played library, checking books out to each other. We pored over the exciting new set of encyclopedias which our parents, like many conscientious moms and dads of the 1950s, had bought from a traveling salesman. I still remember the feel of the cool linoleum floor against my cheek as I lay resting from a warm afternoon outdoor adventure, listening with Daddy to the Sunday baseball game. 

So, the kid world was pretty much non-stop fun. The adult world, however, was complicated.  Things didn't always add up. Sometimes Mommy was crying -- a puzzling occurrence with no explanations offered. Sometimes Daddy was talking on the phone in a strange way -- I didn't know the word furtive in those days. But we kids didn't pause too much on these things which we didn't understand. We just carried on with our gloriously fun world of play.

From the present point of view I look back and put together the evidence, add up the clues, construct the jigsaw puzzle. Dang, it turns out that we had the proverbial elephant in the room. Elephants, actually. In all the rooms of the farmhouse.

But watch any nature show and you'll find out how kind and resourceful elephants are, and such bulwarks of protection toward their young. Hence, I can't say that we had elephants at home. They were more like hyenas -- whose reputations include selfishness and sneakiness and slyness.

Aw, my dear parents, I'm not saying that they were hyenas. Far from it. They were absolutely loving and they treasured us kids. And we -- me, my brother, and my little sister, who came along in the post-farm era -- loved them back.

The hyenas were the big, big problems that our folks carried with them. Our dear Daddy, I figured out years later, was ensnared in alcohol. And sweet Mommy, we deduced many more years later, was struggling hard with chronic anxiety. 

But alcohol and anxiety, especially given the conventions of the time, could not be named. Could not be admitted. Could not be revealed. Could not be discussed.

Truth-telling. We kids learned to do that in the small, nameable things. We couldn't learn to do that in a larger sense because within the atmosphere of home, because truth-telling was compromised, incomplete. We did get by okay, though. We took the goodness of the kid years and the love of our parents, added onto it, and eventually grew up to be pretty good people.

Satya. That is something I continue to figure out, to this day. All of us kids have journeyed, making our way into the deeper reaches of truth-telling.

Now, if I just could have figured out how to climb higher in the old cottonwood!

Thursday, August 20, 2015

Of what use is that old fellow, the ego?

"The ego in the life of the individual has its useful purposes, I'm sure," I was musing. Probably trying to justify some recent, egregious out-of-bounds move of mine. 

But really. Since we've evolved to have an ego, along with our amazing physical bodies, and all the layers of bodies that go along with -- it must be of some use.


Or, to use the saying that the kids brought home from sixth grade environmental camp up at Woodleaf, "God made dirt. And dirt don't hurt!"


I just found, re-found, a very clear little passage on the role of the ego. It's from Sad Vani: A Collection of the Teaching of Sri Anandamayi MA as reported by Bhaiji, translated by Atmananda. More about these remarkable folks in a future post.


69.
You often declare that the ego is the root of all evil; in actual fact however, this is not so. While the ego is the cause of birth and death, it also helps toward liberation. 

The development of the ego and of the spirit of independence has made the individual feel cut off from God. To uproot this sense of separateness, the use of will power is indispensable. 
The man who has merged his ego in the Divine or surrendered it completely to God Almighty, the Lord of the universe, may depend on the working of Providence; but a person with a strong sense of self-reliance, who feels that he is the doer, must exert himself in everything he undertakes. 
So long as intelligence rules a person's life, it means that the ego still exists and that the person is responsible for actions and their results. 
Resign yourself entirely to the One or else be intensely absorbed in Self-inquiry. Although karma may still have to be worked out, by and by the perplexities and problems of the ego will diminish and finally fade away.