Christina Feldman

Been thinking a lot about stillness, simplicity and contentment, and somehow came across Christine Feldman's article "Stillness and Insight". It was the right article for me at the right time. 

Recently read her book Boundless Heart. I was really going to quote it up, but returned the book. She speaks on my vibration level. She has talks on Dharma Seed. She has a book on compassion and I'm reading the Analayo book on Compassion, so that might be my next book if I can get ahold of it. 

"The Buddha said it is not the right time to undertake samatha practice if you have a lot of things in the world demanding your attention. If you’re heavily in debt, or have family or relationship obligations that require attention, or if your body is ill and you are hav­ing to care for it. If there are multiple unresolved issues in your life that are going to be continu­ally demanding your attention, then the condi­tions for samatha practice are not ripe. It is said that in order to begin the deep dimension of samatha practice, it is important that the mind must be fairly happy, it should be easy to collect itself, that it’s not kind of stirred with things that are causing a lot of anxiety or concern."

My thought in reading that quote is to wonder if the Buddhist has a equanimity that isn't quite fragile. If so many conditions are required to reach these higher meditate states, and that's supposed to provide you inner resources to cope with whatever happens, but really it's jigging the circumstances to not be challenged. This line of thinking makes me want to cleave towards Mahayana.

Theravada has you seek enlightenment, no small goal. Withdraw from society and go for it. It's not an easy thing. Mahayana has you ethical, meditate and giving for the benefit of others. You might not get there, but at least you're trying to be helpful and kind to others. The other oriented outlook, helps to counteract the perhaps individualism of going for enlightenment. Of course if you have insight, you realize we're all connected, and as it says in the bible, what you do to the least of people, you do to me.

The justification for seeking out enlightenment is as follows (From Compassion and Emptiness by Analayo):

"If one is not tamed oneself and wishes to tame someone else who is untamed, that is impossible. [If] one is drowning oneself and wishes to rescue someone else who is drowning, that is impossible. [If] one has not extinguished one’s own [defilements] and wishes to make someone else with unextinguished [defilements] extinguish them, that is impossible..."

I don't actually think that is true. A little nervous not agreeing with the Buddhavacana. There are so many instances where you can work with someone in collaboration and cooperatively towards a goal. I'm no Buddha, but the Buddha figured it out without anyone else.

Somehow I feel this is related, though it's a bit of a stretch. I don't see Stoicism as a "philosophy". It's just, "suck it up," and, "walk it off," combined with, "it's your judgements that cause the pain so quit it." Maybe it's a little more than that. Maybe you recognize how you're creating pain for yourself and then you try not to do that. I think that's a basic psychological technique, but you can call it stoicism. Maybe I'm shading more towards the "nothing special" side of Zen with this line of thinking.