[Excerpts from an article by Loch Kelly in “When am I?” :Tricycle : September 08, 2015. The writer explains something about the present moment that’s held my attention for a long time, vis-à-vis the concept of present moment awareness as in “Postcards from the Present Moment” : dhammafootsteps.com]
In Tibetan Buddhism, the Now is considered the “timeless time” that includes the three relative times of past, present, and future. We know not to get caught in the past or the future, but in order to be in the Now, we also have to let go of the present. The Now is not confined by relative clock time, yet it is also not pure timelessness. The Now is the meeting place of timeless spacious awareness with the relative world and its conventional time. The Now does not come and go, but includes everything all at once. When we’re aware of being in the Now, present moments come and go, like ripples and waves in the ocean of awake awareness.
We cannot enter present moments because they move too fast and change continuously. Contemporary Tibetan Buddhist teacher Mingyur Rinpoche says, “If you examine even the present moment carefully, you find that it also is made up of earlier and later moments. In the end, if you keep examining the present moment, you find that there is no present moment that exists either.”
One of the great insights we can get from mindfulness meditation practice is that each moment of experience arises and passes. Having a direct experience of this impermanence, from observing awareness, helps us let go of the attempt to calcify any single moment of time, to try to make something stable that is not. When we really get a feeling for the coming and going of moments, it helps us break the illusion of a solid, separate self, which gives us relief from suffering.
The present time is not the Now. When Gampopa, an 11th-century Buddhist teacher, said, “Don’t invite the future. Don’t pursue the past. Let go of the present. Relax right now,” he was pointing to the fact that trying to locate yourself in any of the three relative times, including the present, can cause suffering – it’s not always a benefit to strive to be in the present. While working as a psychotherapist, I saw that the distinguishing feature of clinical depression is feeling stuck in the present. As one client said, “It feels like there is only this present, unbearable pain and no hope of it changing.”
The most important thing to know is that we are always already in the Now—however, we are not always aware of being in the Now. You can only know the Now from awake awareness. Many of us have experienced being in the Now when we were “in the zone” or in a panoramic flow state, but we can’t be aware of being in the Now from our everyday, ego-identified state of mind. We can shift through the door of the Now into awake awareness, or when abiding in awake awareness, we can begin to notice the feeling of being in the Now. The purpose of clarifying and distinguishing the Now from the present and present moment is for us to be able to shift into being in the Now and know we are here.
From Shift Into Freedom: The Science and Practice of Open-hearted Awareness, by Loch Kelly.
In other words, if we’re going to be more cheerful in the future, it’s because of our aspiration and exertion to be cheerful in the present. What we do accumulates; the future is the result of what we do right now.
Closing#2: Bangkok: Now we are herein the year twenty-three, I thought it worthwhile to offer a few thoughts about the number 23. What I mean is the belief that the number 23 has some sort of magical or mystical significance, because of all the instances in which it occurs. A quick dive into internet and the many web pages exploring the “enigma of 23” tells me: All of us humans have 23 pairs of chromosomes in our genetic makeup.The Earth is inclined on its orbital plane by 23.5 degrees. The “point-five” can be represented as 5 = 2 + 3. The September 11 attacks occurred on 9/11/2001, 9 + 11 + 2 + 1 = 23. Psalm 23 The Lord is my shepherd; I shall not want. The letter W has 2 points down and 3 up = 23. It is also the 23rd letter of the alphabet. Harpo Marx’s birthday was Nov. 23, 1888, and Bonnie and Clyde’s death on May 23, 1934. There are more. Twenty-three seems to pop up when you least expect it… That’s how it was for me, many years ago, a friend told me that he had learned about the mystery of 23 on his 23rd birthday by somebody else who said, once you start to think about it, the number twenty-three seems to arrive in your awareness in all kinds of ways: a bookmarked page number, parts of car numbers, parts of phone numbers, house numbers… and if you have the ability to perceive “truth” in nearly anything, you can associate 23 with; all sorts of extraordinary things. But you don’t have to do that, he said; just note the incidental nature of it appearing in ordinary consciousness. So that’s what my friend did and after a while it just started to appear in daily life. When we were driving around town, he’d point out 23 here and there, so I decide to start doing that too and sure enough, it begins to get my attention every now and then… or maybe it doesn’t for quite a long time, then suddenly it’s the 23rd of the month, or a utilities bill arrives and the first two digits of the reference number are 23 – it is significant if only because it appears in so many forms. And so, it seemed to follow along with me for many years. Then I came to live in Thailand and it disappeared, maybe because there isn’t so much communicative imagery out there, trying to get my attention, or if there is, I don’t pay attention to it because it’s all in Thai.The prevalence of 23 can be explained as an example of ‘apophenia,’ the tendency to see connections or meaningful patterns between unrelated or random things. Or ‘selection bias,’ which refers to the falsification of a statistical analysis, resulting from the method of collecting samples. Also ‘confirmation bias,’ the tendency to search for, or interpret information in a way that confirms or supports prior beliefs or values.Whatever, what I’m saying is; if after reading this, you find the number 23 appearing in ordinary incidental awareness from time to time, check back here and see if anybody else has noticed it. That’s all, and have a good day.
Closing#1: Bangkok: Hi everybody, I thought I’d introduce two members of the household. The grey and white has a French name, he is Benoit [ben-wa]. The ginger one is Croissant [kwa-son] … when she curls up to sleep, she looks like a croissant. Their owner is M our niece who lives with us. She came down from Chiang Mai with the cattos (note; they are not cats, they are cattos; it’s a special species) … so the cattos came in a friend’s car, a seven-hour journey. A long time, but Benoit and Croissant were free to explore the whole of the interior of the car – look out the windows, ‘where are we now?’ Food and water and toilet box behind the back seats… then sleep together somewhere among the blankets.
Now they are here, and it’s been nearly a year. They integrate with nearly every aspect of our lives; this is their residence; this is their world. They can’t go out to the garden beyond the screen doors. Everything they need is in here, a staircase they can run up and down on, get exercise, fall asleep together somewhere upstairs or downstairs – get lost in sleep… [more later]
OLD NOTEBOOKS: Bangkok: In Buddhism there is no continuing, personal Self, only a temporary, constantly changing, aggregation of mental and physical elements. For all intents and purposes there is no self. There is no God, no divine being in human form. There is, however, an understanding of the Divine Spark’ of the Gnostics; the spark of knowing: gnosis, consciousness. Christian Gnostic groups in the first century AD, emphasized personal spiritual knowledge above the orthodox teachings, and traditions. The quiet struggle against the authority of religious institutions continues up to the present day. Franciscan friar, Richard Rohr says people are disillusioned with conservative churches that teach that nonbelievers go to Hell.
So, what happened to the Gnostic writings which flourished among Christian groups in the Mediterranean world? Fathers of the early Church in the second century, denounced them as heresy. Efforts to destroy these texts proved largely successful, resulting in the survival of very little writing by Gnostic theologians. What were these early Gnostics mainly concerned about? According to the Jewish Torah (the first five books of the Christian Bible), God plants the two trees of knowledge and immortality in the Garden of Eden, yet forbids Adam and Eve to eat from them. He warns the other gods, the Elohim, that if humans should taste omniscience and everlasting life, they will become divine like God himself, and this must be prevented at all costs.
The Gnostics felt that if God was truly good, he wouldn’t want to keep these divine gifts from humankind, and therefore concluded that the God of the Old Testament is evil, a malignant being who traps human souls in the world of matter he created. In order to keep them subject to his power, they believed, he must prevent them from realizing their true nature—that they are divine beings from a kingdom of light which transcends the world of suffering in which he keeps them enslaved.
This alternative reading of the book of Genesis can be found in the Nag Hammadi texts ‘On the Origin of the World and The Hypostasis of the Archons.’ The Nag Hammadi texts were discovered in Egypt in 1945. There is so much to find in these texts, including the dialogue between Jesus and his brother James. Jesus explicitly tells James, “Free yourself from this blind idea, that you are merely the case of flesh which encircles you. Then you will reach Him Who is. Then you will no longer be James; rather you are the One Who is.” It’s amazing to find this Vedantic teaching, from India, claiming that the individual soul (Atman) is identical with God himself (Brahman), spelled out so clearly in an early Christian text. Today Christians believe that only Christ was “one” with God, but Jesus seems to be saying that the rest of us are too.
“We cannot attain the presence of God because we’re already totally in the presence of God. What’s missing is awareness.” [Richard Rohr] According to Rohr’s teachings, a person does not have to follow Jesus or practice any formal religion to come by salvation, but rather “fall in love with the divine presence, under whatever name.” The Perennial Tradition, or Perennial Philosophy, forms the basis of much of his teaching. “God’s love for the world has existed since the beginning of time, suffuses everything in creation, and has been present in all cultures and civilizations. Jesus is an incarnation of that spirit. But this spirit can also be found through Buddhist meditation, or through communing with nature. This is the Cosmic Christ, who always was, who became incarnate in time, and who is still being revealed.”
In an early Latin work Eckhart asserts, ‘God is existence’ (Deus est esse), that ‘existence is God’(esse est deus). The ‘isness’ of all that exists is God. This is the ‘birth of the Son of God in the soul.’ In Eckhart’s Christology the reason for the Incarnation (indeed, for the Creation) is that human beings might come to a realization or conscious awareness of themselves as the ‘image and likeness of God’, bringing forth or ‘giving birth’ to the Son of God within their innermost soul. Christ is understood not as Redeemer but as Reminder: ‘Christ came to remind us of our blessed and divine origins as images and likenesses of God in a grace-filled universe. The purpose of his coming is more our divinization than our redemption from sin and guilt.’
“The ineffable reality of God lies beyond our ordinary comprehension.” I have only just started finding out about this special kind of Christian contemplation (apophaticism) that rejects all the attributes and ideas about God we’ve known since we were children, and staying in the ‘darkness’ of a state of “unknowing.” Thus, arriving at this experiential union with the divine.
There are many things about this kind of Christian contemplation that seem very ‘Buddhist’ to me, I recognise the state of unknowing as being that which is outside human experience. Not impossible that the Buddha’s Dhamma had an influence on the Jesus Teachings. Maybe that’s why I had this strange recognition of it, déjà vu, when I first went to Wat Pah Nanachat in 1984. Studying Buddhism revealed fragments of an innate knowledge.
Instead of being deluded by the conditioned realm, I observe it. There is the state of knowing, of being aware of the changingness of conditioned phenomena – behind which there is the Unconditioned. With intuitive awareness – we find that silence, the unconditioned, as an embracing background, within which the conditions are in perspective. They are the way they are, they’re like this: but then they end, they cease. [Ajahn Sumedho. Escape. Forest Sangha Newsletter: October 2000]
Excerpts from the following:
Richard Rohr: “Richard Rohr Reorders the Universe,” The New Yorker, February2, 2020
Christopher Malcolm Knauf: Meister Eckhart and the ‘Wayless Way’.
Lynda Johnsen: Gnostic Texts Reveal Jesus in a New Light
POSTCARD#500: Bangkok: Three years have passed since we were last on this Bangkok-Chiang Mai flight, the marker in time is COVID-19. Hard to believe it’s been three years. These days, the passing of time is all of a oneness… I’m ‘flying away’ in a manner of speaking, as the mind wanders where it will. Grateful for the mindful collectedness to ‘know’ the mind has gone adrift and bring it back to where it’s at. We landed in Chiang Mai and made our way to the apartment, stepping back into the quietude of mountains and trees all around.
An easefulness, this is how it was on the flight today, maybe it was that airborne feeling, but as soon as I close my eyes, I stop thinking, and there’s just nothing there. Awareness of the cold air on my head coming from the air vent above – that specific feeling. Otherwise, no thinking, no input, nothing. There’s a huge empty space where my thinking used to be… it leads me to consider that this is why the world exists; the desire to be thinking – but then I realise I’m thinking again.
I spend most of the time thinking about how to see it, how to get there, but not actually “seeing it” or “getting there.” How to get out of this conundrum? You have to be an accomplished meditator to do that, and there are only a few in this world, I have to find them and observe and see how it’s done. One Buddhist monk we can follow is Ajahn Brahm and I want to bring you into his world in the examination of this wonderful Pali word which means: ‘one-pointedness’ (ekaggatā)… he is talking about the first jhāna:
“One-pointedness is mindfulness that is sharply focused on a minute area of existence. It is one-pointed in space because it sees only the point-source of bliss. It is one-pointed in time because it perceives only the present moment, so exclusively and precisely that all notion of time completely disappears. And it is one-pointed in phenomena because it knows only one object – the mental object of pīti-sukha (joy happiness), and is totally oblivious to the world of the five senses and one’s physical body.
Such one-pointedness in space produces the peculiar experience, only found in jhāna, of non-dual consciousness, where one is fully aware but only of one thing, and from one angle, for timeless periods. Consciousness is so focused on the one thing that the faculty of comprehension is suspended a while. Only after the one-pointedness is dissipated, and one has emerged from the jhāna, will one be able to recognize these features of the first jhāna and comprehend them all.
The one-pointedness in time produces the extraordinary stability of the first jhāna (Note the Wobble), allowing it to last effortlessly for such a long period of time. The concept of time relies on measuring intervals from past to present or present to future of from past to future. When all that is perceived within the first jhāna is the precise moment of now, then there is no room for measuring time. All intervals have closed. It is replaced with timelessness unmoving.
One-pointedness of phenomena produces the exceptional occurrence of bliss upon bliss, unchanging throughout the duration of the jhāna. Mystic traditions more recent than Buddhism have been so overwhelmed by the pure otherworldliness of the first jhāna, they have understood the experience as ‘union with God.’ (April 29, 2022) However, the first jhāna is the first level of supramundane bliss and there are another seven levels of jhāna to experience.” [Mindfulness, Bliss, and Beyond, Ajahn Brahm]
Following up on the Eckhart and Zen discussion recently, I came across another Buddhist monk who can bridge the gap between Christian and Buddhist Mystics:
“Just because Buddhism rejects a discussion of a personified Godhead, does not mean there are not many parallels that can be drawn to mystics in the various theistic religions. Since theists tend to describe their God in terms of an infinite dimension, then I believe it is reasonable to acknowledge that the nonmaterial absorptions (arupa-jhanas) are fundamentally the experience of the union (yoga) with the infinite God/Jehovah/Brahma.” [Jhanananda (Jeffrey S. Brooks)]
There’s more to be said on this subject and I’ll continue to research the parallels between the theists and the atheists. In doing so we will perhaps move away from the way the dhammafootsteps blog has been going since 2012 (Note: This is the 500th post), and mark the new decade with a new format. What I’m planning to do is reblog or reprint texts from related sources and write a short analysis here and there, similar to recent posts on Meister Eckhart. Let’s see, what I’m saying dear readers, is I cannot continue blogging the way I’ve been doing these last ten years. My eyesight is not good enough; macular degeneration in the right eye.
The condition alters what I see around the centre of vision; horizontal lines appear to have a ‘bend’ in the middle, it means lines of text are distorted and I can’t read the words unless I close my right eye and look through my left eye. Also, these small black spots like mosquitos moving over the page take the place of random punctuation marks. Treatment started in June 2022 and is ‘ongoing.’
You can imagine then; it takes a very long time to write a post and I depend on the spell checker app to tell me when I have the spacing between words all wrong. I’m dependent also on the automated suggestions app for rewriting sentences that don’t make sense in their present form. With the help of these aids, and my keen interest in the subject, I expect to be propelled into finding the texts to re-blog, re-publish… and re-new!
Let other people do the talking and I shall take a back seat for a while. Remember, your comments and dialogue are the actual Postcards from the Present Moment. Merry Christmas to One and All
The Big Buddha at Bodh Gaya, a religious site and place of pilgrimage associated with the Mahabodhi Temple Complex in Gaya district in the Indian state of Bihar. It is the place where Gautama Buddha is said to have attained Enlightenment (Pali: bodhi) under what became known as the Bodhi Tree. Since antiquity, Bodh Gaya has remained the object of pilgrimage and veneration both for Hindus and Buddhists
Photo by Abhijeet Gourav
OLD NOTEBOOKS: BANGKOK: The overwhelming immense presence of the image above, in my mind, says something about the experience of the Buddha within., and because I’m a Western Buddhist, I cannot ignore the writings of Fourteenth Century German Christian Mystic, Meister Eckhart, who refers to the experience of being a ‘Son of God,’ the latent capacity in all of us to leave the Teachings behind and simply become God. Eckhart goes on to say furthermore, we can leave the concept of God and explore the Godhead. He uses the word ‘nothingness’ in the sense of śūnyatā (emptiness) a state of mind that, in Mahāyāna Buddhism, refers to the principle that all things are empty of intrinsic existence and nature. In Theravāda Buddhism, śūnyatā refers to the non-self (anattā) and it is slightly different; one becomes an Arahant: gains insight into the true nature of existence and has achieved Nirvana thus liberated from the endless cycle of rebirth.
There’s something about Eckhart that strikes a chord, rings a bell – identifies the missing piece of a jigsaw that completes the picture. Why? Because it springs from my own European heritage. The theory of Eckhart makes sense, the practice is something for another post. At the moment the question is, how to make myself fit to receive the revelation of the eternal birth? The article that follows this, answers parts of the question I have about how to begin.
When I was a young person there was no guidance on how to even start on the Path of Revelation. So, I wandered away from my UK home and ended up in India, like so many from my generation at that time. There I discovered the missing piece of the puzzle; Advaita Vedanta – I wrote a post about it:
https://dhammafootsteps.com/2012/07/01/jesus-was-advaitist/ That was 10 years ago, trying to say something about the struggle to find Real Meaning in a world of television, consumerism and now the picture looks pretty grim over there; poverty in spirit, not to say poverty as an actuality – Real Poverty. Now 10 years later I’m still in Asia, returning to the Jesus Teachings by way of Meister Eckhart. From the very beginning, it has been a revelation to find so many Google references to Eckhart and Buddhism. The following are notes from an article taken from the Buddha Space blog (source at the end):
Buddha and Eckhart: On Nothingness:
“According to Meister Eckhart, God gives birth to his Son in the solitary soul. ‘The Father begets me as his Son, as his very same Son (…). The ‘birth of God in the soul,’ spoken of here in the language of the Christian doctrine of the Trinity, is the leap to realization of his own authentic life that man experiences in ‘solitariness’ with the surrender of the ego.”
The above quotation, along with the others in this article, are taken from the essay ‘”Nothingness” in Meister Eckhart and Zen Buddhism’ by Ueda Shizuteru. As with other Buddhist scholars, including the famous D. T. Suzuki, Ueda had an intense interest in the writings of Meister Eckhart, the Medieval Dominican priest. Not surprising, really, when we examine some of the parallels between Eckhart and the teachings of the Buddha. Take the above quote, for example. Ueda extracts the essential similarity between Buddhism and Eckhartian theology; both involve the giving up of the sense of being a separate self or ego, which dies into the greater reality which the Buddha named Nirvana and Eckhart called God.
“‘The Father begets me as his Son, without any distinction.’ This means that the absolute event of salvation touches each and every individual in its full originality, without first passing through a mediator. This being the case, Eckhart stands very close to Mahayana Buddhism, the philosophical-religious base of Zen Buddhism. According to Mahayana teaching, the very same awakening to the very same truth transforms each and every individual into the very same Buddha – that is, it makes each individual the same ‘Awakened One’ that it made of the historical Buddha, Gautama.”
Ueda’s insight that Eckhart’s view (or experience) of the Son is “without any distinction” and parallels the Mahayana Buddhist belief that every ‘Awakened One’ is the Buddha is worth reflecting upon. For, whereas in conventional Christian thought, Jesus is God’s only begotten Son, and we are separate from Christ and God, even at the deepest level of being, Eckhart insists that if we practice correctly, we can merge into God, and are his Son just as Jesus was/is. Imagine declaring to a Christian congregation, “I am the Son – and so are you!” This identification with being God’s Son is mirrored in the Zen experience of being Buddha, that is to say, discovering that the essence of being is Buddha.
In essence, this realization that we are all Buddha is the case with Theravada Buddhism also, as the Buddha is considered the first Arahant (in this age), and that everyone that achieves full awakening is also an arahant. (‘Arahant’ is a term that denotes an enlightened person in the Theravada tradition, and is the ideal in that form of Buddhism. The title ‘Buddha’ is reserved for the historical Shakyamuni Buddha, Siddhartha Gautama, and his predecessors that all discovered the Buddhist truths independently and then established Buddhism in eras when it had disappeared. Despite these differences, in the light of the central truth of enlightenment or salvation as understood by the Buddha and Eckhart, we can say that Arahant, Buddha, and Son are all descriptions of those who have been ‘saved’ from life’s sufferings.
“So far the similarity is only of a general nature. A more deep-reaching spiritual kinship appears when Eckhart speaks of a ‘breakthrough to the nothingness of the godhead.’ ‘The soul is not content with being a Son of God.’ ‘The soul wants to penetrate to the simple ground of God, to the silent desert where not a trace of distinction is to be seen, neither Father nor Son nor Holy Spirit.’ By carrying out in radical fashion his Neoplatonically laden understanding of ‘being one,’ Eckhart transfers the essence or ground of God back beyond the divine God to the simple modeless, formless, unthinkable, and unspeakable purity that he calls, in distinction to God, ‘godhead,’ and that he describes as a nothingness.”
This “simple, modeless, formless, unthinkable, and unspeakable purity” that Eckhart calls “godhead” comes very close to the Buddha’s description of nirvana as “the Unborn, Unoriginated, Uncreated and Unformed” If the godless is formless, then it’s not the gendered god envisaged by most Christians, sat atop a throne with a long beard and flowing robes. This “silent desert” without “a trace of distinction” is not, as Eckhart clearly states, the Holy Trinity nor any one of its Persons, but is “a nothingness.” As with Buddhist explanations of nirvana, the idea of nothingness can be easily misunderstood. As the forest monk Ajahn Sumedho has suggested, by writing the word as “no-thingness” we emphasize that it is not a thing, rather than point to nothing.
“For Eckhart, the nothingness of the godhead is, in a non-objective manner, the soul’s very own ground. Hence the soul, in order to return to its original ground, must break through God and out into the nothingness of the godhead. In so doing the soul must ‘take leave of God’ and ‘become void of God.’ This is accomplished only if the soul lets go of itself as what has been united with God. This is what Eckhart understands by extreme ‘solitariness,’ the ‘fundamental death.'”
For the Christian word ‘soul’ Buddhists (and nonreligious types) can substitute the term ‘mind.’ Doing so, we can better relate to Eckhart’s assertion that “the nothingness of the godhead is…the soul’s very ground.” In other words, these minds and bodies which are created things in a world of things are not self; indeed, there is no such individual, separate self. At heart, the “original ground” of our being, is this nothingness that is “void of God.” Reading Eckhart’s words carefully, it would seem that to achieve this realization, we need to practice meditation or silent prayer, and allow the soul (or mind) to let go of its self-identification which has surrendered to the idea of God (or Buddha) and rest in the godhead that is nothingness. This is because self is an entity, God is an entity, Buddha is an entity, and no-thingness is beyond all entities or things. Put another way, in Eckhart’s view, surrendering to God is an important stage to full salvation (or enlightenment), but to achieve the latter we must let go of everything, dying as a separate self into the nothingness of what he calls the godhead.
“In Eckhart’s thought it is the category of ‘substance’ that is, in the last analysis, definitive. But concomitant with this arrival at, and insistence on, the imageless and formless nature of substance pure and simple, Eckhart advances a radical de-imaging of the soul which is consummated in and as a ceaseless ‘letting go.’ This ‘letting go’ accords his teaching its extremely dynamic quality, corresponding to the dynamic of the Zen coincidence of negation and affirmation – except that in Zen, where we see a radical execution of the Mahayana Buddhist thinking on relatedness, the scope of coincidence is wider than it is in Eckhart.”
By “substance,” Ueda refers to that same nothingness that we have been discussing, and which is also known as ‘the ground of being’ elsewhere. By “a ceaseless ‘letting go,'” Eckhart and Ueda refer to the process of realizing the truth of not-self. We can observe the world, the body, and even the mind (or ‘soul’) and see that none of them constitute a self, and in this realization, we get to the heart of the religious life as envisaged by both the Buddha and Meister Eckhart. This “de-imaging” is the act of letting go with mindfulness, as in meditation and deep prayer. By the “coincidence of negation and affirmation,” Ueda alludes to the Zen tradition of the koan that leads to an alogical experience of life, where opposites merge into a single, interrelated and interdependent understanding of existence. Ueda, as an advocate of Zen Buddhism proposes that it has a broader significance than Eckhart’s theology of nothingness, which is an issue that the current author is unqualified to comment on. In this article, along with several others, the striking similarities between some of the Buddha’s teachings and those of Meister Eckhart have been shown to be well worth reflecting upon for the open-minded Buddhist – not to mention the open-minded Christian! Whether or not you agree with the claims of Eckhart or this blog author, it is hoped that the material printed here has been interesting to you and has perhaps touched your beliefs or practices, or both. Reaching out to other traditions than our own can be of much benefit if done with kindness and consideration. It is not the claim of this author or others such as Ueda Shizuteru featured herein that the Buddha and Meister Eckhart experienced and taught exactly the same (No-)thing. There are notable coincidences within their respective teachings however, that glisten with the merest of polishings, and it is in this spirit that the Buddha & Eckhart Reflections have been offered. May all beings be happy!
POSTCARD#499: Bangkok: [Continuing with last week’s theme: “The Divine in us”] I was amazed to ‘hear the voice’ of Meister Eckhart reaching out to me from the 14th Century with observations on life that could have been expressed in recent times. All the more amazing to read his words on the subject of time and discover this was even more in context than I thought:
A day, whether six or seven (days) ago, or more than six thousand years ago, is just as near to the present as yesterday. Why? Because all time is contained in the present Now-moment. Time comes of the revolution of the heavens and day began with the first revolution. God makes the world and all things in this present now. Time gone a thousand years ago is now as present and as near to God as this very instant.
For me, also strangely synchronistic, are the words: the ‘Now-moment,’ because, without knowing or having read Eckhart before, I decided only a few years ago to name one of my Blog Categories: ‘The Now Moment.’ Another thing I find to be a remarkable coincidence is that my post of October 10, 2016 contains the following: ‘Language gives everything names, Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday… different ways of describing present time. It’s always today, no matter if I call it yesterday, tomorrow or next week – today is every day.’ Perhaps not so unusual when you think of the social construct that surrounds us now and would have in Eckhart’s day: “The world we have experienced (since we were children), has been psychologically, socially, and linguistically constructed. As we (become adults), we learn to see the world in the way that everyone else does, but we don’t realize that’s what’s happening. We think we are seeing reality itself.”[David Loy, the interview with Insight Journal] It’s possible Eckhart wouldn’t have wanted to call it a construct, without it being in some way, God’s construct.
Being is God… God and being are the same. Everything that is has the fact of its being through being and from being… there is nothing prior to being because that which confers being creates and is a creator. To create is to give being out of nothing.
And here is Eckhart’s 14th Century Fundamental Truth, ‘Being is God.’ Even though I might be inclined to separate ‘God’ from ‘Being,’ I can’t. Maybe I need to change the word ‘God’ to something less emotive… I’m used to the Buddhist no-self (anatta) but it doesn’t convey the same breathless urgency of Eckhart’s sermon.
What is life? God's being is my life, but if it is so, then what is God's must be mine and what is mine God's. God's is-ness is my is-ness, and neither more nor less. They just live eternally with God, on a par with God, neither deeper nor higher. All their work is done by God and God's by them.
The Buddhist experience is this ‘is-ness’ or suchness (tathatā) and the idea of God creating the world out of nothing, in absolute present time is familiar to the Buddhist point of view in the context of Emptiness (śūnyatā). There are other connections between Eckhart and Mahayana Buddhism but I must leave that for another time. What I’ve been most taken with is the approachability of Eckhart’s God.
“I am as sure as I live that nothing is so near to me as God. God is nearer to me than I am to myself; my existence depends on the nearness and the presence of God.”
What jumps out at me here is the following: ‘God is nearer to me than I am to myself.’ Time and space disappear and I have an immediate closeness with this 14th Century Christian mystic.
The eye with which I see God is exactly the same eye with which God sees me. My eye and God’s eye are one eye, one seeing, one knowledge, and one love
The universality of this statement is that much more effective than other metaphors on the Eye. This is the eye that sees ‘me,’ and I am seen by God, just as I see God and God is seen by ‘me.’ I’d like to close with another non-dual quote by David Loy, in the interview with Insight Journal:
“We are not in time because we are time. Our nature is temporal which means we are not things; we are bundles of physical and mental processes. And when we become nondual with those processes, the past is not something that falls away, and the future is not something that’s coming. Then we live “in” what is sometimes called the eternal present. Etymologically the word “eternity” means without beginning and without end. What is without beginning and without end? It’s always now.”
Image: File:Rathausturm Köln – Meister Eckhart – Johann I. (Brabant)-4871.jpg