Bad Day? Here’s a reminder not to take yourself too seriously.

Via elephant journal
on Dec 21, 2009
get elephant's newsletter

rod stewart sexy

Our capacity to take ourself seriously is nearly limitless. You want proof?

Picture 454

If Rod can sing and gyrate about how sexxxy he is with…that hair…those pants…hey.

YouTube Preview Image

The cosmic joke, as Chogyam Trungpa put it, is on all of us. Life is suffering. It’s also a dream.

So, smile.

cosmic joke trungpa

Or, as Longchenpa, another great Buddhist teacher put it…well, the quote’s on the back of my stickard:

longchenpa


68,399 views

About elephant journal

elephant journal is dedicated to "bringing together those working (and playing) to create enlightened society." We're about anything that helps us to live a good life that's also good for others, and our planet. >>> Founded as a print magazine in 2002, we went national in 2005 and then (because mainstream magazine distribution is wildly inefficient from an eco-responsible point of view) transitioned online in 2009. >>> elephant's been named to 30 top new media lists, and was voted #1 in the US on twitter's Shorty Awards for #green content...two years running. >>> Get involved: > Subscribe to our free Best of the Week e-newsletter. > Follow us on Twitter Fan us on Facebook. > Write: send article or query. > Advertise. > Pay for what you read, help indie journalism survive and thrive. Questions? info elephantjournal com

Comments

59 Responses to “Bad Day? Here’s a reminder not to take yourself too seriously.”

  1. You see, there it is again–that gaping difference between Buddhism and Yoga, which I keep trying so hard to explain and study away. In spite of their common roots and overwhelming similarities:

    Buddhism concludes we are nothing, a cosmic joke.

    Yoga concludes we are everything, that we are the cosmos itself.

    (Do you think I possibly missed your point of not taking ourselves too seriously?)

    Bob Weisenberg
    http://YogaDemystified.com

  2. kia says:

    Hey Bob. I am not a scholar in these matters but do have an opinion. For me they are reconciled in non-permanence and our views on attachment. We are only here in this moment as this self, it is fleeting and will change moment to moment so I need to let go to that attachment to a permanent idea of myself because I am always changing. In yoga that fleeting moment is only captured in an asana practice (as a type of yoga example) when that asana is being enacted, and even then there are opportunities to alter it in those 90 seconds or whatever. Enact in your asana practice with heart because you will improve in that "union" that is the ultimate goal in yoga, but even if you think you have achieved your goal the achievement it is fleeting.

    If you are a more goal-oriented yogi then you can graph your goal on a timeline with some measure of your performance but expect to find oscillations along the trend you are seeking… and even if you are rocking your practice something can happen and a trend can collapse to zero in no time… you just don't know. It is not worth building up our ego, or basing our identity around how attached we are to a practice. Practice with heart/integrity, just don't let it be the basis of your identity.

  3. Thanks, Matt.

    (Before I say anything, let me clearly state that I'm raising these issues to help me learn more about Buddhism, and for no other purpose. I'm amazed at my chutzpa raising questions about Buddhism here in this cyber-temple of Buddhism. What am I, nuts? I'm doing it only so I can learn from everyone here, and I enjoy provoking interesting discussions to that end. I hope no one takes offense. I realize I don't know much yet.)

    Your reply is very helpful, but it does reinforce my feelings about the differences between Buddhism and Yoga.

    (continued below)

  4. I don't think of Bhuddism as negative, just kind of limiting, precisely for the reason you cite above–a disinclination to engage in the larger ineffable, but to me totally convincing, truths of metaphysics–an insistence on bringing us all down to earth instead of letting our spirits soar, which Yoga seems to encourage and Buddhism seems to consider just another illusion of the ego.

    Yoga solves the problem of fuzzy metaphysics not by avoiding it, but by embracing the infinite wonder of the unknowable as the central tenant of Yoga philosophy. We don't know exactly what the life-force of the universe is, but we know it's infinitely wondrous, and that we are an integral part of that wondrousness.

    Bob Weisenberg
    http://YogaDemystified.com

  5. Matt says:

    Svasti, true there are many schools of Buddhism and yoga, but I don't see Shambhala (Trungpa) or any of the Buddhist schools listed which conclude that "we are nothing." Most schools use emptiness or sunyata as a teaching tool (rather than a fixed concept), but this is merely a means of showing that the skandhas are empty. That's not to say the skandhas are all bad–we need them to function in our practical, day-to-day lives, after all. It simply ends in suffering to *identify* and overzealously attach to them–or worse yet, to not see the attachment at all.

  6. Svasti.

    Very good points! Even with my very limited knowledge, I'm fully aware that both Yoga and Buddhism cover a vast array of philosophical schools, so much so that one easily can find Yoga that's just like Buddhism and Buddhism that's just like Yoga.

    So anything I say about Yoga and Buddhism needs to be preceded by "in general as they are presented by the majority of their current devotees".

    I'm not particularly "worried about reconciling" them, as you say. It's just that I'm a strong Jnana (Yoga of knowledge and study) personality. So discussion and debate are how I like to learn things.

    Thanks for your help.

    Bob Weisenberg
    http://YogaDemystified.com

  7. Thanks, Matt.

    Just so no one thinks you were quoting me, I never in a million years would say something like "I don't need no stinkin' Buddhism"! And I still consider Buddhism and Yoga to be closely related spiritual traditions, not a situation where I embrace one and reject the other.

    I think you are are vastly underestimating Yoga's depth in handling the issue of suffering. In this aspect, Yoga is pretty much like Buddhism. Most of the Yoga Sutra reads almost exactly like any Buddhist text. It's the Bhagavad Gita and the Upanishads that are so dramatically different than, say, the Dhammapada.

    Like you, I'm assuming I want to know a lot about both. That's why I'm asking all these questions! And the conversation so far hasn't certainly not disappointed.

    Bob Weisenberg
    http://YogaDemystified.com

  8. Very interesting twist, Matt. Thanks.

    Yeah, both Yoga and Buddhism see the futility of trying to define the infinite unknowable life-force of the universe. Buddhism largely solves this by just avoiding the subject and focusing on the workings of our mind. Yoga, by contrast, largely solves it by worshiping the very concept of infinite unknowability.

    Anybody follow that? Then please explain it to me!

    Bob Weisenberg
    http://YogaDemystified.com

  9. But most importantly, click the sexxxy link above and watch the video! Impossible to take yourself seriously watching that thing.

  10. Actually John, what initially inspired my puzzlement about Buddhism was your recent article "The Zen of a Good Sh*t" http://bit.ly/8kmsgU in which you explained in some detail, seriously as far as I could tell, why Buddhism was like taking a shit.

    I really expected a lot of Boulder Buddhaphiles to jump in and say, "No, John, that's not what Buddhism is like at all."

    But much to my surprise, none of them did! In fact they all wrote in and said, "That's beautiful, John. Buddhism really is exactly like taking a shit."

    That's when I started to get confused.

    Thanks again to everyone who joined in here. It's been a great discussion–fun and informative.

    Bob Weisenberg
    http://YogaDemystified.com

  11. integralhack says:

    Bob,

    I don't think it is a good metaphor either and not all Buddhists see meditating–satisfying or not–as the end goal. But I suspect John didn't expect this particular metaphor to become representative of his practice. 😉

    I did like John's second reference to shit–in that we all have our own shit (particularly putrid skandhas) that we need to deal with. That's where the metaphor has more punch. Buddhism has a great tradition of via negativa dialectic for exposing our own shit and transcending it. Nagarjuna made it a high art.

    It is indicative that as soon as you seek to describe something spiritual, you lose it. Language helps us along, but ultimately we have to make the journey ourselves.

  12. Brothers and Sisters, All:

    Namaste! Having the privilege (some might say "misfortune"!) of having been ordained as a monk in the Advaita (yogic) tradition, the feral wisdom (Tibetan) Buddhist tradition and as a nontheistic (retired) Catholic monastic and former bishop, I hope I can bring a little more clarity to what seems to be one of the great stumbling blocks of the Western culture, trying to get their arms around the Dharma.

    Buddhism is not and never was a nihilistic philosophy. It is best to understand the concept of Sunyata not by simply focusing on the idea that all phenomena share the same "empty" nature, and therefore are unreal in the "Absolute Reality", but rather to view sunyata as an ocean, which viewed from one shore appears to be nothing, and on the other shore appears to be all things.

    Where we get caught up is, I believe, in not taking the last step. Yes, the phenomenal world is "real" in our subjective reality. And yes, the subjective world is emptiness in the Absolute Reality, but there is one further step — the numenal reality, in which all these concepts themselves dissolve, and all that is realised is Oneness.

    Yoga seeks to explore and experience the Oneness in a way that is, at its core, tantric. Kundalini rising can accelerate the awareness of the ultimate (numenal) reality for the yogic adept. The Buddhist path had many approaches, all of which still lead to that ultimate awareness as well. Some quicker. Some not. Karma ripens at the rate at which it ripens.

    In the end, it is not a pissing contest, although many Westerners attempt to make it so. And that's where they get lost. Neither Yoga nor Buddhism will be an effective path, when the mind is twisted and attached to such dualistic ideas as "this vs. that".

    Both are ultimately expressions of Advaita philosophy, although the semantics may vary from culture to culture.

    We can discover nothing in either path, until we still and quiet the ego-mind, so that it becomes free to soar.

    Peace!

    — dharmacharya gurudas sunyatananda
    The Contemplative Monks of the Eightfold Path

  13. integralhack says:

    Gurudas,

    Beautiful description of Sunyata and Oneness and I like the Advaita summary! I'm thankful that you accepted my invitation to jump into this conversation.

    -Matt (@integralhack on Twitter)

  14. LindaSama says:

    I agree also — on everything said.

  15. Thanks, Tobye! This is an astounding conclusion to a great conversation. (Well, maybe not the conclusion quite yet.)

    Your wonderful and eloquent summary takes us right back to where we started. Everything that you write above about the universe being a single energy with many different forms could have come right out of the Upanishads or the Bhagavad Gita, WITH ONE ENORMOUS EXCEPTION.

    Instead of concluding that "we don't exist" because we are all one energy, the ancient Yoga texts conclude that we all exist in an infinitely more wondrous form called Brahman that is way beyond our ability to fully understand or comprehend.

    In other words, instead of us being nothing as you say, each of us is the infinitely-wondrous, blindingly-amazing life-force of the universe itself. Instead of being nothing we are everything.

    While this sounds "high-falutin" on the surface, as some have written above, to me it makes perfect sense because it acknowledges that even though we can understand that we are all just energy, we aren't even close to understanding the ultimate source of that energy and its wondrous manifestations.

    That's what Yoga and some schools of Buddhism call God. It's not really a deity, but an acknowledgement of the infinite, awesome, very real but ultimately unknowable, wonder of the universe.

    You know what? In spite of this apparent big difference in point of view, I think we are actually looking at two sides of the very same coin, my friend!

    Thanks again for your excellent comment.

    Bob Weisenberg
    http://YogaDemystified.com

  16. Thanks, Tobye! This is an astounding conclusion to a great conversation. (Well, maybe not the conclusion quite yet.)

    Your wonderful and eloquent summary takes us right back to where we started. Everything that you write above about the universe being a single energy with many different forms could have come right out of the Upanishads or the Bhagavad Gita, WITH ONE ENORMOUS EXCEPTION.

    Instead of concluding that "we don't exist" because we are all one energy, the ancient Yoga texts conclude that we all exist in an infinitely more wondrous form called Brahman that is way beyond our ability to fully understand or comprehend.

    In other words, instead of us being nothing as you say, each of us is the infinitely-wondrous, blindingly-amazing life-force of the universe itself. Instead of being nothing we are everything.

    While this sounds "high-falutin" on the surface, as some have written above, to me it makes perfect sense because it acknowledges that even though we can understand that we are all just energy, we aren't even close to understanding the ultimate source of that energy and its wondrous manifestations.

    That's what Yoga and some schools of Buddhism call God. It's not really a deity, but an acknowledgement of the infinite, awesome, very real but ultimately unknowable, wonder of the universe.

    You know what? In spite of this apparent big difference in point of view, I think we are actually looking at two sides of the very same coin, my friend!

    Thanks again for your excellent comment.

    Bob Weisenberg
    http://YogaDemystified.com

  17. integralhack says:

    Just a little clarification: Buddhists–at least Buddhists that have their view on straight–don't conclude that "we don't exist." My reference to "high falutin" was just a joke aimed at those (not necessarily those in this discussion) who reference nirvana or enlightenment as an attainment (and therefore an attachment).

  18. Thanks, Matt. I appreciate the clarification.

    I think I knew your use of high falutin' was somewhat in gest, but it captured the idea that others expressed that Yoga is sort of ethereal and in-the-clouds compared to good old down-to-earth Buddhism, which doesn't engage in that sort of fantasy.

    I don't see this as a right or wrong, myself, just a personal preference. Some people are more into down-to-earthness and some people are more into infinite-wonder-of-the-universe.

    Thanks again for helping make this such a fascinating discussion with all your comments.

    Bob Weisenberg
    http://YogaDemystified.com

  19. intergralhack.

    I was just thinking some more about your reference in your last comment to "those…who reference nirvana or enlightenment as a attainment (and therefore an attachment)".

    What spiritual discipline doesn't see some sort of happiness as the result of practice? Even the Dalai Lama himself says the purpose of life is to find happiness.

    Bob Weisenberg
    http://YogaDemystified.com

  20. David says:

    Since we are nothing, we are everything.

  21. Greg says:

    Wonderful dialogue. Was disappointed I found it so late in the thread.

    Love the clarification (by a number of posters) regarding Buddhism not being nihilism. In years past, I made the mistake of spending too much time debating nihilistic Buddhists and decided to leave the task to others. Was happy to see so many who were conversant and eloquent on the topic.

    The easiest way I found to dissipate the confusion regarding nothing was to rephrase to No Thing. In other words, we find the Self to be that which IS but which is No Thing. Being without Thing-ness. A Buddha transcends the phenomenal nature of the skandhas. The skandhas are that which is Not Self.

    I believe the Oneness concept creates as much confusion. It tends to result in identification with all phenomena (I am all Things) rather than recognizing Being that is No Thing — not phenomenal in nature.

    Oneness may lead to the idea that "Since we are nothing, we are everything" as opposed to "Since we are not phenomena we are No Thing, not one thing or many things or all things. Rather we are No Thingness.)

    The difference that came with Buddhism perhaps can best be explained as going beyond the All One of phenomena to that Self which is No Thing and thus beyond all identification.

    In Yoga practice (as well as other mystical practices) one may encounter an All One universe of light but from the Buddha's view (and from the practice) this universe of light, where all appears One, is itself a fabrication and thus not fundamental or Absolute.

    In a sense I guess one could say that zero and one are fabrications and thus one goes "beyond" to a state where zero and one do not have meaning as we understand it when we think in phenomenal or relative terms.

    Anyway, risking being too serious, I will leave those thoughts and move on…

  22. Hi, Greg. Your input is warmly welcome. Thanks for taking the time to write such an interesting and insightful comment.

    We devotees of "Radical Traditional Yoga" have another whole approach to the conundrum of "what are we exactly?" that you so precisely analyse above. But instead of trying to figure it out, we just surrender to the awesome, unfathomable, unknowable, infinite wonder of it all.

    To be conscious of the wonder of the universe, of which we are clearly an integral part, blows us away, to the extent that logical niceties don't seem to matter much anymore.

    (continued below)

  23. It's all in the Upanishads and Bhagavad Gita, but it becomes overwhelmingly meaningful only because to us it is the most absolute reality of all reality, and not the semi-hallucinatory state that many more down-to-earth Buddhist thinkers see in Yoga.

    After all these excellent discussions, I still fee this is a major difference between core Yoga and core Buddhism. It's the difference between the Upanishads and the Dhammapada. And it's not right or wrong, good or bad. It is, like I wrote earlier, and you wrote in your comment, just two sides of the same coin.

    Bob Weisenberg
    http://YogaDemystified.com

  24. Ramesh says:

    I find the neti aspect of non-dualism perhaps very similar in spirit to the 'cosmic joke'.

  25. Tim says:

    Think of reality as nothing but pure light or energy. This can be described as emptiness or non-emptiness, but the enlightened will realize that there is no sense in this dualistic conception.

  26. Jennifer says:

    Now here are people who are really good at making two out of one.

  27. ARCreated says:

    my brain just melted. Thanks :)

  28. Eric says:

    Since we are everything, we are nothing.

  29. […] Longchenpa Spirituality, meditation, enlightenment isn’t serious stuff. If you’re overly serious ab…. For many years, this beautifully-calligraphed quote hung in Marpa House. Not sure where it hangs, […]

Leave a Reply