[This is the “missing” post for Monday, July 12th.You can request an audio recording of Monday’s practice via a comment below or (for a slightly faster reply) you can email me at myra (at) ajoyfulpractice.com.
In the spirit of generosity (“dana”), the Zoom classes, recordings, and blog posts are freely given and freely received. If you are able to support these teachings, please do so as your heart moves you. (NOTE: You can donate even if you are “attending” a practice that is not designated as a “Common Ground Meditation Center” practice, or you can purchase class(es). Donations are tax deductible; class purchases are not necessarily deductible.
Check out the “Class Schedules” calendar for upcoming classes. If you are using an Apple device/browser and the calendar is no longer loading, please email me at myra (at) ajoyfulpractice.com at least 20 minutes before the practice you would like to attend.]
“The question is not what you look at, but what you see.”
– quoted from a journal entry dated August 5, 1851, as printed in The Writings of Henry David Thoreau: Journal, Walden Edition by Henry David Thoreau, compiled and edited by Franklin Benjamin Sanborn and Bradford Torrey
At the beginning of the Common Ground Meditation Center practices, before I start the recording, we do a little round robin of introductions that includes people’s names, pronouns, any requests they might have, and a prompt question (that people may or may not choose to answer). Even when the prompt question is, “How are you feeling today?” it is somehow (secretly) connected to the theme of the practice.
Sometimes, as I did this week, I ask a question that I couldn’t have asked 200 years ago; a question the answer to which would have been very different if asked 100 years ago or even 20 or 30 years ago. This week’s question: Are you a mental picture taker or an actual picture taker? The answer to that question has changed as photographic technology has, umm… developed.
Ten years ago, there was no Instagram. Twenty years ago there was no Facebook or YouTube. One hundred years ago, no one was going into the woods as Henry David Thoreau (born July 12, 1817) did and posting selfies or videos of how they lived deliberately and sucked out all the marrow of life. Two hundred years ago, one of the leading film innovators, George Eastman wasn’t even born yet. (He was born July 12, 1854.)
Monday’s class was all about Thoreau and Eastman, but it was also about taking mental snapshots – of ourselves, our bodies, our circumstances, and even people and things around us. Our memories are far from perfect and, even when our senses are taking everything in, we are not always consciously aware of what we are observing/sensing. Photographs and videos can do a better job of preserving a moment, but they aren’t perfect either. Even with the right lighting, the right angle, and panoramic camera feature, these recordings are only capture a reflection of a moment – which is not the same as the moment.
Sure, a picture can show us something we had forgotten or something we didn’t observe/sense in the moment. However, there can also be optical illusions created by the lighting, the angle, and the camera’s mechanisms. As much as we’d like to believe otherwise, we are only given a moment in that moment.
“I wanted to live deep and suck out all the marrow of life, to live so sturdily and Spartan-like as to put to rout all that was not life, to cut a broad swath and shave close, to drive life into a corner, and reduce it to its lowest terms, and, if it proved to be mean, why then to get the whole and genuine meanness of it, and publish its meanness to the world; or if it were sublime, to know it by experience, and be able to give a true account of it in my next excursion.”
– quoted from “Where I Lived, and What I Lived For” in Walden, or Life in the Woods by Henry David Thoreau
“What we do during our working hours determines what we have; what we do in our leisure hours determines what we are.”
– George Eastman
If you haven’t noticed, I’m a mental picture kind of person. Yes, pictures of me, places that I’ve been, and the people with whom I spend my time exist. However, I’m more likely to soak up a moment, in the moment, than I am to take an actual picture of the moment. I’m more likely to remind myself to “remember this” even as I recognize that I’m already in the process of “forgetting this.” And, even when I take a picture, I rarely go back and look at it.
My tendency to eschew photos has not always been my personal trend. One of my maternal great-uncles was an avid photographer and when one of my brothers and I lived near him he was constantly taking us around the Washington, D. C. area and photographing us at area landmarks. These photos are amazing and look like the kinds of pictures you would find in an advertisement. In fact, for many years, those photos and the experience of those “photo shoots” had me considered modeling. I actually did some modeling in my preteens and early teens – you know, back when I was a kid and my height was not considered an obstacle. But, overall, I wasn’t (and still am not) a fan of candid shots or random selfies.
Don’t get me wrong – I love photographs… of other people (and landscapes). But, like a lot of people, I’m not overly fond of pictures of myself. They almost always seem to catch me with my eyes closed, a funny expression on my face, and/or they just don’t look like I think I look. As I highlighted in last year’s post, there’s a little history behind the science of film that relates to this. There’s also a little science, similar to the reason why very few people like to hear recordings of themselves, behind why people may not like the way they look in photos.
“We are repeatedly exposed to ideas in the media that support social norms and stereotypes. This can facilitate our own adoption of these ideas, which can sometimes be harmful. A 2008 study found that exposure to faces of an Asian ethnicity led participants to develop positive attitudes towards other Asian faces shown to them. This indicates that the amount and nature of exposure different ethnicities receive influences their popular perception in society. It is commonly understood that minority populations are shown less in western media, and are often shown in ways that support racial prejudice.”
– quoted from The Decision Lab’s “Why do we prefer things that we are familiar with? The Mere Exposure Effect, explained.”
According to the “mere-exposure effect” (also known as the familiarity principle), people develop a preference for things with which they are most familiar. Psychologists have conducted studies about this phenomenon using words, Hanzi (Chinese characters), paintings, geometric figures, and even sounds (played for chicks before and after they hatched). Similar research has also been conducted with actual people and photographs of people. Time and time again, the research shows a preference for things with which we are familiar and a tendency to avoid things that are unfamiliar. The familiar brings “warmth,” a feeling of affection – even when we don’t recognize it as such. The unfamiliar brings confusion, sometimes fear and a strong desire to disassociate and/or avoid.
If you are thinking, “Wait, I look in the mirror and see myself every day. Wouldn’t the ‘mere-exposure effect’ support me liking pictures of myself?” As it turns out, the answer is no; because what you see in the mirror is not what you see in the photo. What we see in a picture is the version of us with which our friends, family, colleagues, and acquaintances are familiar. But, it’s the reverse of what we see in the mirror. Remember, we are mostly asymmetrical and our reflection is not our true image.
So, looking at pictures of ourselves is akin to what happens when someone listening to a recording of us hears us, but we hear something completely different. With sound, we often talk about “air conduction” and how our own voice reaches our inner ear in a different manner than external voices – and, therefore, the vibration that reaches the brain is different. However, studies have shown that physiology is only part of the reason we don’t like our own voices when we hear a recording. The other part is psychological: familiarity. In fact, studies have shown that if we hear a recording of our voice mixed in with unknown voices, we are likely to express a preference for our own voice (even if we don’t automatically recognize it as ours).
“If you drive, you probably see yourself as a competent, considerate, skillful driver, especially compared with the morons and [others] you face on the road on a daily basis. If you are like the typical subject, you believe you are slightly more attractive than the average person, a bit smarter, a smidgen better at solving puzzles and figuring out riddles, a better listener, a cut above when it comes to leadership skills, in possession of paramount moral fiber, more interesting than the people passing you on the street, and on and on it goes.”
– quoted from You Are Now Less Dumb: How to Conquer Mob Mentality, How to Buy Happiness, and All the Other Ways to Outsmart Yourself by David McRaney
Our voice and image are all tied to our sense of self and, on a certain level, our self esteem. According to a 2017 Psychology Today article by Madeleine A. Fugère Ph.D., one of the reasons we may not like our own pictures is because of self-enhancement bias, which is a psychological cocktail that results in people having a mental picture of themselves that is not 100% accurate. Self-enhancement bias is primarily a combination of “illusory superiority bias” (whereby we judge others harsher than we judge ourselves and view ourselves as special); the illusion of control (believing that we are more responsible for our successes than our failures); and “optimism bias” (the belief in the back of our minds that things will work out for the best).
Obviously, some people are more optimistic than others and – due to social and psychological conditioning – some people have more of each of these attributes than others. However, the bottom line is that, in the base case, a healthy human being believes they are slightly more attractive than others may find them. When we look in a mirror, we can move around and adjust things to engage our “confirmation bias.” But, there’s no changing a recording. Additionally, if we are already prone to disliking a picture – before it’s even taken – our “hindsight bias” kicks in along with our “confirmation bias.”
Of course, as Dr. Fugère points out, we can use these same psychological tendencies to become more familiar with images of ourselves. And, similar studies show that this also works with recordings. First, we can take and look at our pictures more often. Some people even suggest looking at older pictures of ourselves (which may actually fit our mental picture). Also, some research has shown that while other people may like regular pictures of us, we may prefer selfies. (Even though I didn’t come across evidence of this, it may be because the camera is flipped in reverse when we take our own picture.) Finally, the best pictures are, of course, the pictures we associate with a positive memory and emotional experience – and studies show that happy people are attractive people.
All of which contributes to why influencers may be inflating their self esteem – sometimes in a way that is healthy (but, sometimes in a way that becomes really unrealistic and, therefore, detrimental to themselves and their followers).
All of which also means that my tendency to avoid pictures, may not be serving me in every moment.
“A report in 2010 published in the British Journal of Social Psychology suggests that you even see yourself as more human than other people. The findings predict that no matter what country you come from, no matter your culture, if aliens chose you to represent the entire species as Earth’s ambassador, you would feel as though you could fulfill that role better than most. When asked, most people believed they exhibited the traits that make humans unique in the animal kingdom more than the average person. In 2010, UCLA researchers conducted a survey of more than 25,000 people ages 18 – 75 and found that the majority rated their own attractiveness as about a seven out of ten. This suggests that the average person thinks that he is better looking than the average person. About a third of the people under 30 rated themselves as somewhere around a nine. That sort of confidence is fun to think about considering that it is impossible for everyone to be better-looking than half the population.”
– quoted from You Are Now Less Dumb: How to Conquer Mob Mentality, How to Buy Happiness, and All the Other Ways to Outsmart Yourself by David McRaney
There is no playlist for the Common Ground practice.
[You can find last year’s blog post on Thoreau and Eastman’s birthday in the bolded links above.]
Back in the modeling days!
### “Light makes photography. Embrace light. Admire it. Love it. But above all, know light. Know it for all you are worth….” GE ###
With the exception of today’s class information and the embedded video, this is an abridged version of the post from July 7, 2020. Both versions were slightly revised in 2023.
“He showed the words ‘chocolate cake’ to a group of Americans and recorded their word associations. ‘Guilt’ was the top response. If that strikes you as unexceptional, consider the response of French eaters to the same prompt: ‘celebration.’”
– from In Defense of Food: An Eater’s Manifesto by Michael Pollan
When people like something (or someone) – I mean, really, really like something (or someone) – they sometimes say “it’s the best thing since sliced bread” – which is funny when you consider that there’s only one day honoring “sliced bread.” On the flip side, there are at least ten days devoted to chocolate:
Bittersweet Chocolate Day (January 10th)
Chocolate Day in Ghana (the second largest producer of cocoa) (February 14th)
World Chocolate or International Chocolate Day (July 7th and/or 9th)
World Chocolate Day in Latvia (July 11th)
Milk Chocolate Day (July 28th)
S. National Confectioners Association’s International Chocolate Day (September 13th)
White Chocolate Day (September 22nd)
National Chocolate Day in the United States (October 28th)
Chocolate Covered Anything Day (December 16th)
Chocolate contains phenols, which may act as antioxidants in the body and reduce “bad” cholesterol. Other documented health benefits to eating chocolate include the fact that chocolate can cause the brain to release all four of its so-called “love chemicals” (oxytocin, serotonin, dopamine, and endorphins). That, however, doesn’t explain why there are so many different kinds of chocolate. I mean, when you really get down to it, there are probably as many kinds of chocolate – and ways of enjoying chocolate (or, in my opinion, ruining chocolate) – as there are people on the planet. We can break chocolate down as chocolatiers do: into real chocolate (made from chocolate liquor and cocoa butter) and compound coatings/chocolate (cocoa powder and vegetable oil). However, even then there are different kinds of chocolate.
Some people say mass produced chocolate in the USA tastes like plastic compared to chocolate from Europe. (It kinda does, see previous paragraph to understand why.) Some people only like chocolate in candy, while others only appreciate it in cake or brownie form. Dogs can only eat white chocolate, because, well… it’s not actually chocolate. And some people will eat anything – and I do mean anything – covered in chocolate.
Chocolate has a long history of being used as a gift / token of affection and friendship. It also has a long wartime history as it was consumed during the U. S. Revolutionary War and has been a standard part of the United States military ration since the original ration D or D ration bar of 1937. The D ration bar was intended to “taste a little better than a boiled potato.” Arguably, it did not (but, the K ration bars arguably did.) Allied soldiers reportedly gave bits of chocolate to people they freed from concentration camps and it is still something soldiers use to establish connections in the field. According to The Chocolate Store, (US) Americans consume 2.8 billion pounds of chocolate per year (over 11 pounds per person), which is significantly more than our European counterparts – who, I’ll repeat, arguably have access to better mass produced chocolate.
Maybe one of these (chocolate) days, I’ll do a deep dive into why there are so many different days celebrating chocolate. (I mean, other than the obvious commercial reasons and well… because it’s chocolate.) Today, however, I just want to point out that people are as particular about chocolate as they are about beer, wine, and burgers – which makes yoga a lot like chocolate.
None of that, however, points to why we compare really amazing things to sliced bread instead of to chocolate.
“He was a very patient, inventive man. He had an office in the basement of this big house they lived in, in Davenport, Iowa, that he called his dog house. He went there every time he got in trouble with my grandmother. When he was there, he was inventing or thinking about inventing things.”
– Susan Steinhauer Hettinger talking about her grandfather Otto Frederick Rohwedder
Otto Frederick Rohwedder, born today in 1880, in Davenport, Iowa, invented the first automatic bread-slicing machine for commercial use. Rohwedder was an inventor and engineer who studied optometry and spent a short period of time as a jeweler. His work with jewelry and watches inspired him to create machines that would make life easier for people.
After a delay, due to a fire that destroyed his original blueprints and prototype, Rohwedder was able to apply for a patent and sell his first bread-slicing machine, which also wrapped the bread to ensure freshness. He sold his first machine to his friend Frank Bench, owner of Chillicothe Baking Company in Chillicothe, Missouri and his second machine to Gustav Papendick in Saint Louis, Missouri in 1928. Papendick reportedly improved upon the way the machine wrapped the bread and applied for his own patents. While there is some argument about who sold the very first loaf of sliced bread using Rohwedder’s machine, documented evidence points to Bench selling the first loaf today in 1928. It was advertised as “the greatest forward step in the baking industry since bread was wrapped.”
Texas Toast not-withstanding, commercially sliced bread was thinner and more easily accessible than a regular loaf of bread – so people ate more bread. Like chocolate, sliced bread was rationed in the United States during World War II. In fact, sliced bread was briefly banned in 1943. Whether the ban was lifted because of the huge outcry from regular every day housewives and people like New York City Mayor Fiorello Henry La Guardia or because there just wasn’t that much saved in the ban is a matter of opinion.
Bottom line, sliced-bread changed people’s lives and the way they moved through their days… kind of like yoga.
Please join me today (Wednesday, July 7th) at 4:30 PM or 7:15 PM for a yoga practice on Zoom.Use the link from the “Class Schedules” calendar if you run into any problems checking into the class. You will need to register for the 7:15 PM class if you have not already done so. Give yourself extra time to log in if you have not upgraded to Zoom 5.0. You can request an audio recording of this practice via a comment below or by emailing myra (at) ajoyfulpractice.com.
Wednesday’s playlist is available on YouTube and Spotify. [Look for “07072021 Bread & Chocolate”]
If you are using an Apple device/browser and the “Class Schedules” calendar is no longer loading, you may need to upgrade your browser, or you can email me at myra (at) ajoyfulpractice.com at least 20 minutes before the practice you would like to attend.
In the spirit of generosity (“dana”), the Zoom classes, playlists, and blog posts are freely given and freely received. If you are able to support these teachings, please do so as your heart moves you. (NOTE: You can donate even if you are “attending” a practice that is not designated as a “Common Ground Meditation Center” practice, or you can purchase class(es). (Donations to Common Ground and Mind Body Solutions are tax deductible; class purchases and donations directly to me are not necessarily deductible.)
[This is the “missing” post for Monday, July 5th. You can request an audio recording of Monday’s practice via a comment belowor (for a slightly faster reply) you can email me at myra (at) ajoyfulpractice.com.
In the spirit of generosity (“dana”), the Zoom classes, recordings, and blog posts are freely given and freely received. If you are able to support these teachings, please do so as your heart moves you. (NOTE: You can donate even if you are “attending” a practice that is not designated as a “Common Ground Meditation Center” practice, or you can purchase class(es). Donations are tax deductible; class purchases are not necessarily deductible.
Check out the “Class Schedules” calendar for upcoming classes. If you are using an Apple device/browser and the calendar is no longer loading, please email me at myra (at) ajoyfulpractice.com at least 20 minutes before the practice you would like to attend.]
“The liberating current brings us excitement, energy, and novelty, while the descending current brings us peace, grace, and stability. In order for either of these pathways to really be complete, all of the chakras need to be open and active. Liberation without limitation leaves us vague, scattered, and confused. We may have wonderful ideas and lots of knowledge, but we are unable to bring these fruits to any tangible completion. On the other hand, limitation without liberation is dull and stifling. We become caught in repetitive patterns, clinging to security and fearing change.”
– quoted from “Chapter 1 – And the Wheel Turns: Liberation and Manifestation” of Wheels of Life: A Users Guide to the Chakra System by Anodea Judith, Ph.D.
Sometimes in yoga, I talk about the inhale literally being an “inspiration” (from the Latin, by way of Old French and Middle English) whereby we are filled with spirit. The exhale is, by the same logic (Latin by way of late Middle English), an “expiration” whereby something is literally expiring, returning to the source. Some of you have even heard me say, “Inhale down your spine, in the direction of the manifesting current; taking all the possibilities of the Universe and making them your unique experience. Exhale back up your spine, in the direction of the liberating current, taking your unique experiences (and efforts) back to the source.” In Wheels of Life: A Users Guide to the Chakra System, Anodea Judith explores the fact that “we must limit” in order to manifest – and the ancient texts back her up in the idea that there are ways in which we are limited. There are ways we can have a lot, but we can’t have it all.
If we think of the source of all things – whatever that means to you at this moment – then we’re thinking of the source of unlimited possibilities. We’re thinking of something infinite and something limited only by our imagination/understanding – which is finite. On the flip side, we are not omnipotent and/or omnipresent. We can experience multiple sensations at one time, but we can only truly focus-concentrate-meditate on one thing at a time. While our initial possibilities are limitless, our whole lives are built around the experience of “narrowing things down.” So, we do.
There’s nothing wrong with narrowing things down and establishing boundaries. That’s all part of the human experience. Being human means we are constantly swinging like a pendulum between having everything and having nothing – in every area of our lives. We run into problems, however, when we don’t recognize (and appreciate) what we have; when we operate from a perspective of scarcity instead of a point of abundance. We run into problems when we are paralyzed by what we don’t have and/or by something that hasn’t happened.
“The more you can increase fear of drugs, crime, welfare mothers, immigrants and aliens, the more you control all of the people.”
– Dr. Noam Chomsky
“Optimism is a strategy for making a better future. Because unless you believe that the future can be better, it’s unlikely you will step up and take responsibility for making it so. If you assume that there is no hope, you guarantee that there will be no hope. If you assume that there is an instinct for freedom, that there are opportunities to change things, then there is a possibility that you can contribute to making a better world.”
– quoted from Latin America: From Colonization to Globalization by Noam Chomsky (in conversation with Heinz Dieterich, with additional collaboration by Edward Herman; introduction by Denise Glasbeek and Julian Semphill)
Like a lot of people associated with the United States, I spent the last week-plus thinking, contemplating, and discussing the concept of freedom, liberation, and independence. On a certain level, I do that all the time; but there is an acute awareness between PRIDE, Juneteenth, and the Fourth of July – and I start thinking about those concepts on a lot of different levels. The most obvious level in this context, of course, is the legal aspect. However, last Tuesday I referenced the nine obstacles (and their four accompanying physical-mental experiences) outlined in Patanjali’s Yoga Sūtras and, if you go back, those obstacles and ailments are kind of floating under all of this week’s posts, classes, discussions, and meditations. Because, as it turns out, our minds are one of the biggest obstacles to anyone of us experiencing true freedom, liberation, and independence.
Tonight (Monday, July 5th), as well as during the Juneteenth class and in the First Friday Night Special post-practice blog post, I shared the story of how circus elephants are trained not to move beyond a designated circumference. It’s a story I’ve seen and heard a lot of people tell, but I first came across it because of Steve Ross’s yoga practice. The story is a great reminder about how powerful the mind is, how it can literally stop us in our tracks. And, while we might name an endless list of things holding us down and holding us back, it really comes down to one thing: our relationship with fear.
Fear is an emotional response to a perceived threat. I say it all the time: The threat doesn’t have to be real, but the emotional and embodied experience is real. Additionally, a perceived threat can be in the past and yet the emotionally embodied experience can still actively experienced in the present (and, as Lisa Nichols points out, projected into the future). Both fear of failure and fear of success can paralyze us, because at a very early age we were taught that fear equals danger and, when we feel the associated sensations, we have to be still or turn back.
Yes, on a neurophysiology level, fear activates our sympathetic nervous system which activates our fight-flight-freeze response. However, adults teach children what to fear and how to respond to that fear. We know not to stick our hand in the fire or on a hot stove for the same reason we know to look both ways before crossing the street: someone taught us to fear the consequences. Similarly, we teach those who come after us. As we grow through life, we keep the tool of fear – sometimes even more than we use the tool that is our awareness. Eventually, these lessons in fear are just like everything else we experience in life; they hardwire our brains and create samskaras (“mental impressions”).
We view our experiences through previous experiences. Over time our reactions to certain sensations (including certain thoughts) feels instinctual – even though they’re conditioned. Over time, there’s very little (if any) difference between the way we react to the possibility of failing, falling flat on our face, and/or embarrassing our self and the we react to the possibility of a snake in our path.
“As a rope lying in darkness, about whose nature one remains uncertain, is imagined to be a snake or a line of water, so Atman is imagined in various ways.
When the real nature of the rope is ascertained, all misconceptions about it disappear and there arises the conviction that it is nothing but a rope. Even so is the true nature of Atman determined.”
– quoted from “Chapter 2 – Vaitathya Prakarana (The Chapter on Illusion)” (verses 17 and 18) of Mandukya Upanishad [English translation by Swami Nikhilananda]
Remember, I’m talking about the possibility here. I’m talking about the point when the brain goes, “What is that?” Someone can tell you, “Oh, that’s just a big hank of rope someone left out when they pulled their boat in,” but, if you’ve lived around water moccasins your whole life, the adrenaline might already be pumping. It may not even matter that you’re in a part of the world that doesn’t have cottonmouths. You’ve been conditioned – by yourself and others – to stay safe. Just the idea of something we fear can bring up the sensations. In fact, just reading the words above might have caused your body to tense up in preparation. (I know just typing it does the same for me!)
Sacred texts from India, like the Upanishads (“sitting near” devotedly) and the Ashtavakra Gita (The Song of the Man with 8-Bends in His Limbs), often use the idea of a snake to describe our experience with māyā (“illusion”). Interestingly, “Death” sometimes shows up in Hindu mythology as a snake called Yama, which can be translated into English as “binder” and is also the same Sanskrit word used for the first limb of the Yoga Philosophy (Yamas), which consists of five “external restraints.” In other words, the snake we see in the road is a limitation – even if it’s not a snake.
“It is not that you must be free from fear. The moment you try to free yourself from fear, you create resistance against fear. Resistance in any form does not end fear. What is needed, rather than running away or controlling or suppressing or any other resistance, is understanding fear; that means, watch it, learn about it, come directly into contact with it. We are to learn about fear, not how to escape from it, not how to resist it.”
– Jiddu Krishnamurti
I don’t think J. Krishnamurti was telling people to walk up on something that might be a snake and poke it with your finger – just as the writers of the Vedic texts were not necessarily telling people to put themselves in dangerous situations in order to confirm the nature of reality versus illusion. Instead, the practice is about going deeper into the mind-body experience. Where, for instance, do you hold your tension, discomfort, and dis-ease? Where do you hold your fear, anger, disappointment, grief, and confusion? Where, as I asked people on Zoom, do you not feel free, liberated, and independent?
Breathe into those spaces where you don’t feel free, liberated, or independent. Remember, your awareness and your breath are tools you carry with you everywhere. Don’t be a fool! Use those tools! Use the inhale to explore those places where you are holding tightness and create space around those places. Maybe imagine that you are blowing into those areas like you blow into a balloon and feel that expansion. Then, use your exhale to let something go. You may not be ready to let go of everything – and, it’s important to acknowledge that. Just release what you can release and let go of whatever is ready to go.
“There’s a darkness Living deep in my soul It’s still got a purpose to serve”
– quoted from the song “Put Your Lights On” by Santana and Everlast
One of my favorite songs, and one of the star-studded collaborations included on Santana’s record-breaking album Supernatural, was written by Everlast. The title comes from what we do when we’re driving as the sun sets, when we start driving at night, or when it starts to rain: We put our lights on so we can see and be seen. We put our lights on to avoid danger. We put our lights on so we can be less afraid. One of my favorite verses (quoted above) is a reminder that sometimes we need the limitation. Remember, fear is an important neurophysiological tool – that’s why it’s such a great teaching tool. However, we can’t let the tool rule our whole life. Sometimes we have to remember, as the angel in the song also reminds us, “I got nothing to fear.”
When we can, and when we are willing, letting go of something – some attachment to the past, some fear of the unknown – makes us like the elephant that looks down and realizes there’s no stake, no chain, and no shackle. We’re free!
I’ve heard stories about elephants that are considered “escape artists” and no amount of “training,” no matter how brutal, can keep them from testing the limits of their binds. Most elephants, however, never seem to look down. I’ll admit I don’t know a lot about pachyderms. I know the location of their eyes limits them in some way, as does bright lights; so, maybe they can’t see around their trunk and tusks. But, the most likely scenario (especially in cases where the shackle is removed) is that they have been conditioned to fear what happens if they go beyond the originally established boundary.
Ultimately, the circus elephants are limited by their mind-body connection. As are we; which means, if we want to be truly free, in a physical-mental and emotional-energetic way, we have to recognize our stakes to pull them up. We have to recognize our chains to break them. We have to recognize our shackles to release ourselves.
“‘You are the one witness of everything and are always completely free. The cause of your bondage is that you see the witness as something other than this.
…
If one thinks of oneself as free, one is free, and if one thinks of oneself as bound, one is bound. Here this saying is true, “Thinking makes it so.”’”
– quoted from the Ashtavakra Gita (1.7, 1.11) [English translation by John Richards]
There is no playlist for the Common Ground Practice.
“We may think that if we ignore our fears, they’ll go away. But if we bury worries and anxieties in our consciousness, they continue to affect us and bring us more sorrow. We are very afraid of being powerless. But we have the power to look deeply at our fears, and then fear cannot control us. We can transform our fear….
Fear keeps us focused on the past or worried about the future. If we can acknowledge our fear, we can realize that right now we are okay. Right now, today, we are still alive, and our bodies are working marvelously. Our eyes can still see the beautiful sky. Our ears can still hear the voices of our loved ones.”
– quoted from “Introduction – Fearlessness” of Fear: Essential Wisdom for Getting Through the Storm by Thich Nhat Hanh
“It has often and confidently been asserted, that man’s origin can never be known: but ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge: it is those who know little, and not those who know much, who so positively assert that this or that problem will never be solved by science.”
– from The Descent of Man, and Selection in Relation to Sex by Charles Darwin (pub. 1871)
Let’s start with a plea and a digression.
Please, please, please don’t miss understand me. When I say that I’m not a Cardi B fan, I’m not saying that I dislike her (or her music) – I’m just saying that I don’t really listen to rap music. (Although, I really, really, really do get a kick out of those “If Cardi B Did the Sound Effects for Star Wars” videos.) That being said, you would have to have been living under a rock to not have heard Cardi B’s name in the last few years.
Maybe you heard of her because someone loves her music: Her accolades include being the only woman to win the Grammy Award for Best Rap Album as a solo artist and the first female rap artist to have a RIAA Diamond-certified song, which means it sold (and/or streamed) over 10 million units – and in the United States that applies to less than 60 songs. Maybe you heard about her because someone hates her music and/or finds it offensive: Yes, WAP, I’m looking at you and all the records you broke – including making Cardi B the first (and so far, only) female rapper to achieve Billboard Hot 100 chart-topping singles in two decades and the first (and so far, only) female rap artist to top the Global Spotify chart on multiple occasions. Maybe you heard of her because of her relationship with her husband; her relationship with other rappers; and/or allegations (and indictments) for violent and otherwise illegal behavior. Or maybe, you heard about the fact that she recognizes that her songs are not all appropriate for children (and, ergo, won’t let her toddler listen to them).
Maybe you know nothing about her except that she is not shy about her speaking her mind when it comes to politics. (Again, I’m not a fan and I’m not here to condone or debate some/any of her statements. I’ll just say that I can appreciate that she publicly “stans” Eleanor Roosevelt.) You also might have heard about Cardi B recently, because people have been talking about how she announced the fact that she is pregnant with her second child.
In listening to a group of moms talk about Cardi B’s announcement (on social media and at the BET Awards), I was struck by the part where these women – from different generations, but all older than the aforementioned 28-year old – talked about how they didn’t document their pregnancies and/or their children’s lives the way some people do today. The same was true for their mothers and themselves as children. Part of the mom-discussion was about body image and body positivity – which is another point of pride for some and contention for others when it comes to Cardi B. However, some of the conversation was related to technology and the changing awareness around how the most mundane and/or “long and boring” things can also be the most important.
Even when they are not televised.
What happens if we could go back to the begin; go back to our origins? What if we could go back to our origins as a person, our origins as a member of a specific group we decided to join (like a political or social organization) and/or a member of a group (like race, gender, ethnicity, sex, and/or generation) into which we were born? What if we could go back to the origins of our country, our species, or our planet – and watch things unfold in real time?
What if we could see exactly how things developed… or evolved, purely from the stand point of an observer? Would the opportunity to witness the truth or reality of something change our engagement with that something, ourselves, other people and/or the world?
And what if, in going back, we were able to witness how our ideas around such things developed… and evolved?
[The first quote above and the remainder of this post, excluding details and links for current classes, were originally posted on June 30, 2020.]
“We will now discuss in a little more detail the struggle for existence…. I should premise that I use the term Struggle for Existence in a large and metaphorical sense, including dependence of one being on another, and including (which is more important) not only the life of the individual, but success in leaving progeny.”
– from On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life by Charles Darwin (pub. 1859)
On November 24, 1859, Charles Darwin’s On the Origin of the Species was published and created great uproar. There were debates, lectures, protests, and (eventually) trials over Darwin’s controversial ideas. Some events, like the so-called “Scopes Monkey Trial” in July 1925 would have such a circus atmosphere they would be covered by the media at the time and remembered by generations. Others, like the so-called “Huxley-Wilberforce debate” or “Wilberforce-Huxley debate,” were not widely covered at the time, but became the stuff of legends years later.
Today in 1860, 7 months after Darwin’s controversial work was released to the public. John William Draper, one of the founders of the New York University School of Medicine, presented a paper during the British Science Association’s annual meeting. Draper’s paper on “On the Intellectual Development of Europe, considered with reference to the views of Mr. Darwin and others, that the progression of organisms is determined by law” was considered “long and boring,” It was one of several papers presented that week, and could have easily been lost to the world, but it was followed by a rousing debate (or “animated discussion,” depending on who you asked) between Thomas Henry Huxley, Bishop Samuel Wilberforce, Benjamin Brodie, Joseph Dalton Hooker, and Robert FitzRoy (Darwin’s captain and companion during the events chronicled in Darwin’s The Voyage of the Beagle, published in 1839).
Notice, there were other people involved in the discussion, but what people remembered was the very personal exchange between Huxley (who had been privy to Darwin’s work before it was published) and Wilberforce (who, after being asked by the publisher to review Origins, wrote an anonymous attack on the work).
“Is it on your grandmother’s or grandfather’s side that you are descended from an ape?”
– Bishop Samuel Wilberforce to Thomas Henry Huxley (reportedly), June 30, 1860
“I asserted – and I repeat – that a man has no reason to be ashamed of having an ape for his grandfather. If there were an ancestor whom I should feel shame in recalling it would rather be a man – a man of restless and versatile intellect – who, not content with an equivocal success in his own sphere of activity, plunges into scientific questions with which he has no real acquaintance, only to obscure them with aimless rhetoric, and distract the attention of his hearers from the real point at issue by eloquent digressions and skilled appeals to religious prejudice.”
– Thomas Henry Huxley to Bishop Samuel Wilberforce (reportedly), June 30, 1860 (from Life and Letters of Thomas Henry Huxley, by his Son Leonard Huxley by Leonard Huxley (Volume I)
Please join me today (Wednesday, June 30th) at 4:30 PM or 7:15 PM for a yoga practice on Zoom.Use the link from the “Class Schedules” calendar if you run into any problems checking into the class. You will need to register for the 7:15 PM class if you have not already done so. Give yourself extra time to log in if you have not upgraded to Zoom 5.0. You can request an audio recording of this practice via a comment below or by emailing myra (at) ajoyfulpractice.com.
Wednesday’s playlist is available on YouTube and Spotify. [Look for “March 31 Hays Code 2020”]
If you are using an Apple device/browser and the “Class Schedules” calendar is no longer loading, you may need to upgrade your browser, or you can email me at myra (at) ajoyfulpractice.com at least 20 minutes before the practice you would like to attend.
In the spirit of generosity (“dana”), the Zoom classes, playlists, and blog posts are freely given and freely received. If you are able to support these teachings, please do so as your heart moves you. (NOTE: You can donate even if you are “attending” a practice that is not designated as a “Common Ground Meditation Center” practice, or you can purchase class(es). (Donations to Common Ground and Mind Body Solutions are tax deductible; class purchases and donations directly to me are not necessarily deductible.)
(NOTE: I’ve re-set the settings for making comments. And yes, that’s two weeks, out of 3, that I’ve mentioned the Scopes Monkey Trial.)
DON’T FORGET! There’s a “First Friday Night Special” on Friday, July 2nd, 7:15 – 8:20 PM (CST) & the focus will be on “the effort to free/liberate yourself from….” Additional details are available onthe “Class Schedules” calendar.
[This is the “missing” post related to Tuesday, June 15th and includes references to the Monday, June 14th practice.You can request an audio recording of the practices from Monday and/or Tuesday via a comment below or (for a slightly faster reply) you can email me at myra (at) ajoyfulpractice.com.
In the spirit of generosity (“dana”), the Zoom classes, recordings, and blog posts are freely given and freely received. If you are able to support these teachings, please do so as your heart moves you. (NOTE: You can donate even if you are “attending” a practice that is not designated as a “Common Ground Meditation Center” practice, or you can purchase class(es). Donations are tax deductible; class purchases are not necessarily deductible.
Check out the “Class Schedules” calendar for upcoming classes. If you are using an Apple device/browser and the calendar is no longer loading, please email me at myra (at) ajoyfulpractice.com at least 20 minutes before the practice you would like to attend.]
“God, give me strength And keep reminding me That blood is thicker than water Oh, but love is Thicker than blood
And if blood is Thicker than water Then what are we fighting for? We’re all sons and daughters Of something that Means so much more”
– quoted from the song “Thicker Than Blood” by Garth Brooks
June 14th is World Blood Donor Day, which coincides with the birthday of Dr. Karl Landsteiner (b. 06/14/1868). Coincidentally, the day devoted to celebrating and expressing gratitude for the generosity of millions of donors around the world is exactly one day before the anniversary of the first documented successful xenotransfusion. The term “xenotransfusion” shares a root with “xenophobia” (fear of “strangers” or fear of “foreigners”) and was originally used to describe the transfer of blood from one species to another, usually between a non-human and a human. Eventually it was also used to describe blood transfusions between a variety of non-human animal species, including canine to cat, bovine to caprine (cattle to goat), and caprine to bovine.
Several physicians and surgeons had attempted blood transfusion in animals, but the most significant experiments of this nature were conducted in 1666 – 1667 by Dr. Richard Lower (in England) and by Dr. Jean-Baptiste Denys (in Paris). On June 15, 1667, Dr. Denys* (with assistance from Dr. Paul Emmerez) transfused about 12 ounces of sheep blood into the elbow of a 15-year old boy who had been experiencing chronic fever – and who was not finding relief from leeches repeatedly administered by a barber-surgeon. Although most people agree that the small amounts of blood being transfused is what enabled them to avoid the fatal allergic reaction that occurs when mixing blood types (which had not yet been discovered since Dr. Landsteiner hadn’t even been born), Drs. Denys and Emmerez went on to conduct several other successful transfusions.
*NOTE: The information above reflects information from multiple sources which I have consulted since I first learned about the human xenotransfusion. I recently came across something that suggested that while the date, patient details, and source animal were confirmed, the identity of the doctor(s) was not and that Dr. Richard Lower may have conducted the first successful transfusion. However, most sources I researched indicated that Dr. Lower’s first documented xenotransfusion was on November 23, 1667, with the assistance of the surgeon and physician Sir Edmond King. Both Drs. Denys and Lower were physicians to members of the royal family in their respective countries and both may have been ousted from their Courtly roles because of politics. In the case of Dr. Denys, there was also the matter of a patient who died and a trial – during which it came out that the patient didn’t die from a xenotransfusion; they had been poisoned by their wife.
A year ago Monday, and to a certain extent this Monday, I spent World Blood Donor Day focusing on “dana” generosity and the idea that “love is thicker than blood.” I even went down the rabbit hole and got into the etymology of phrases like “blood will tell,” “blood will out,” and “blue-blood.” But this year, when I focused a little more on questions and how the questions we ask can cause us to look at things – ourselves and the world – a certain way, I took another look at the old saying, “Blood is thicker than water, but love is thicker than blood.” Where does the saying come from? And, does it mean what we think it means?
Simple questions, which (as it turns out), are not as simple as they seem.
I often say that the human mind-body is 60-75% water, depending on age, gender, and overall health. Of course, some of that water is (in) the blood and most of that water is saturated with salt, proteins, and other particles. Also, the fluidity of water is partially determined by the temperature of the water. So, the viscosity of water in the body varies. However, if we consider room temperature water (25°C or 77°F) at a pressure of 1 atmosphere then the resistance to flow is 0.00890 poise (or rounded up to 0.009 P or 0.01 P). At 37°C or 98.6°F (an average body temperature), blood plasma viscosity is 0.015 P and whole blood viscosity is 0.04 P.
I know, it’s not exactly apples-to-apples, but those are standard measurement points – and water’s viscosity is about 0.007 P at 37.8°C or 100°F, so I think you get the point. On the flip side, we can’t touch, hold, and measure love; we can only feel it. We can feel it flowing and recognize when there’s a resistance to the flow; but how do we measure that in order to compare it to water or blood? How can we determine if it’s thicker than blood?
Of course, I’m being a little facetious here. The old adage isn’t about physical science at all. It’s about something that is philosophical and metaphysical in nature and, therefore, requires going deeper.
“The first words [Dandie Dinmont, the farmer] said when he had digested the shock, contained a magnanimous declaration, which he probably was not conscious of having uttered aloud – ‘Weel – blude’s thicker than water – she’s welcome to the cheeses and the hams just the same.’”
– quoted from “Volume II, Chapter IX, Die and endow a college or a cat. Pope.” of Guy Mannering, or The Astrologer (pub. 1815) by Sir Walter Scott, Bart
One of the earliest literary references to blood and water can be found in the 12th century narrative poem Reinhart Fuchs, the oldest known German beast epic (which was itself based on a French poem). According to an English translation of a 13th century version of the poem about the trickster fox (Reynard), “I also hear it said that kin-blood [or, clan blood] is not spoiled by water.” Many believe this statement refers to the fact that not even distance or the “tumultuous tides” of the high seas can sever some connections. The idea that one can move away from home, marry into another clan / family, and still have some loyalty to your original family and tribe is an underlying premise in Sir Walter Scott’s novel Guy Mannering, or The Astrologer – which gets the credit of being one of the first literary references of the actual phrase “blood is thicker than water” (even though the phrase appeared in print as early as 1670).
In Sir Walter Scott’s novel, first published anonymously in 1815, Guy Mannering is a guest of the Laird and Lady of Ellangowan. He offers to determine the horoscope of his hosts’ young son, Harry Bertram; however, when he predicts that the boy will have three periods of bad fortune, he decides that the details of the bad fortune should be concealed until the boy turns 5. The only problem: young Harry’s first period of misfortune is getting kidnapped before the age of 5. As the paths of Guy Mannering and Harry Bertram (under his adopted identity) cross again and again in India, England, and then again in Scotland, the heir of Ellangowan (Harry) is presumed dead by all but the Laird’s sister (who has inherited the ancestral home). When the “last will and testament” of Harry’s aunt is read, one of those in attendance points out that she (the deceased) can do with her earthly goods as she desired. As Sir Walter Scott alludes at the beginning of the chapter, she can extend her generosity to a college or a cat; a deceased heir and a servant; and everything in between.
“With them, any two children nourished at the same breast are called ‘milk-brothers,’ or ‘suckling brothers;’ and the tie is very strong. A boy and a girl in this relation cannot marry, even though by birth they had no family relationship….But the Arabs hold that the brothers in the covenant of blood are closer than brothers at a common breast; that those who have tasted each other’s blood are in a surer covenant than those who have tasted the same milk together; that ‘blood-lickers,’ as the blood brothers are sometimes called, are more truly one than ‘milk-brothers,’ or ‘sucking brothers’ ; that, indeed, blood is thicker than milk, as well as thicker than water.”
*
– quoted from “I. THE PRIMITIVE RITE ITESELF. 2. An Ancient Semitic Rite” in The Blood Covenant: a Primitive Rite and It’s Bearing on Scripture by H. Clay Trumbull
Beyond literary references, we can find evidence of people making, reinforcing, and commenting about familial bonds and chosen bonds since the dawn of recorded time. In The Blood Covenant: a Primitive Rite and It’s Bearing on Scripture, the American clergyman and Civil War veteran Henry Clay Trumbull chronicled ancient rituals from around the world that are based on the premise “that the blood is the life ; that the heart , as the blood-fountain, is the very soul of every personality; that blood-transfer is soul transfer; that blood-sharing, human, or divine-human, secures an inter-union of natures; and that a union of the human nature with the divine is the highest ultimate attainment reached out after by the most primitive, as well as by the most enlightened, mind of humanity.” Many of these rituals were described to Trumbull by people who had participated in the rituals themselves and/or were first-hand witnesses.
For example, he wrote about Syrian men in Lebanon becoming brother-friends in a public ceremony involving blood-letting, ingesting, and a blood-smeared written contract (in duplicate) that was worn by the men and that formed a sacred and legal bond that was considered stronger than the legal ties of marriage (as it could not be dissolved). He also described similar African rituals – although, in at least one tribe, the bond was established through contact with incisions made on the hands, stomachs, and right cheeks foreheads and the blood was mixed in “beer” and drunk (as opposed to being licked off a knife). There was also an exchange of gifts to seal the bond. In the aforementioned cases, such bonds required loyalty between the bonded; that each person to defend the other in times of crisis/war; that each person support the other in times of need; and that each be willing to take on the other’s familial responsibilities should the need arise. These bonds could also, in theory, be used to end conflict just as some marriages have been used throughout history. After all, there is power in connection.
“Someone told [Jesus], ‘Your mother and brothers are standing outside, wanting to speak to you.’
He replied to him, ‘Who is my mother, and who are my brothers?’
Pointing to his disciples, he said, ‘Here are my mother and my brothers. For whoever does the will of my Father in heaven is my brother and sister and mother.’”
*
– quoted from The Gospel According to St. Matthew 12:47-50 (NIV)
There are, of course, conversations about covenants (and the power of covenants) throughout the Abrahamic religions – and these conversations are often related to conflict resolution and/or familial responsibility. In addition to the passages (above and below), where Jesus highlights spiritual relationships over (genetic) blood-kin relationships, there is a point in The Gospel According to St. Matthew (specifically Matthew 18) when Jesus instructs his disciples on “Who is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven” [little children] and what to do in various situations, like if one of their “sheep” go astray [leave the others to go after it]. In a situation where one brother “trespass[es]” against another and the two in conflict cannot come to an agreement, they are told to gather “one or two others” who can sever as witnesses [18:16]. Part of the explanation for this instruction comes from 18:20, when he tells the disciples that he/his teachings will be among them when “three or more are gathered in my name….” In other words, the will be more powerful and more spiritual grounded/connected.
These Christian contexts is why some scholars state that the “water” in the old “proverb” refers to “the water of the womb” – which twists the whole saying around. If we accept this etymology or origin of the phrase, the original meaning was always “love is thicker than blood.” If that was always the meaning, then it stands to reason that, at some point in history, someone added that last part to the public lexicon so people would stop misunderstanding the message.
“Near the cross of Jesus stood his mother, his mother’s sister, Mary the wife of Clopas, and Mary Magdalene. When Jesus saw his mother there, and the disciple whom he loved standing nearby, he said to her, “Woman, here is your son, and to the disciple, “Here is your mother.” From that time on, this disciple took her into his home.”
*
– quoted from The Gospel According to St. John 19:25-27 (NIV)
There is no playlist for the Monday night Common Ground practice.
Tuesday’s playlist is available on YouTube and Spotify. [“Look for “06142020 World Blood Donor Day”]
*
### “Love is, thicker than water” ~ Andy Gibb / Barry Gibb ###
[This is the “missing” post related to Sunday, May 23rd. You can request an audio recording of Sunday’s practice via a comment below or (for a slightly faster reply) you can email me at myra (at) ajoyfulpractice.com.
In the spirit of generosity (“dana”), the Zoom classes, recordings, and blog posts are freely given and freely received. If you are able to support these teachings, please do so as your heart moves you. (NOTE: You can donate even if you are “attending” a practice that is not designated as a “Common Ground Meditation Center” practice, or you can purchase class(es). Donations are tax deductible; class purchases are not necessarily deductible.
Check out the “Class Schedules” calendar for upcoming classes. If you are using an Apple device/browser and the calendar is no longer loading, please email me at myra (at) ajoyfulpractice.com at least 20 minutes before the practice you would like to attend.]
“Lest I appear frivolous in even posing the title question, let alone suggesting that it might have an affirmative answer, let me try to place it in proper perspective by offering two propositions. 1. If a single flap of a butterfly’s wings can be instrumental in generating a tornado, so also can all the previous and subsequent flaps of its wings, as can the flaps of the wings of millions of other butterflies, not to mention the activities of innumerable more powerful creatures, including our own species. 2. If the flap of a butterfly’s wings can be instrumental in generating a tornado, it can equally well be instrumental in preventing a tornado. More generally, I am proposing that over the years minuscule disturbances neither increase nor decrease the frequency of occurrence of various weather events such as tornados; the most that they may do is to modify the sequence in which these events occur.”
– from initially untitled speech given by Edward Norton Lorenz at the 139th meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, in Washington, D.C, on December 29, 1972
– “Change in the sequence of the characteristics is the cause for the different appearances of results, consequences, or effects.”
Pick a life, a personal history – maybe one of the one’s I briefly profiled over the last week, maybe your own, or someone else’s you know – and notice where the story begins. More specifically, notice where you begin to tell the story – and how things develop/evolve from there. Consider that your understanding of the story and the sequence of events, your understanding of the person and their motivation, and whether any of it makes sense may change if you start at a different place. Consider, too, that if you change something along the way, like leave out challenges the person had as a child – or the fact that someone had no children, or their children had no children – then the story (and your understanding) also changes to a certain degree. Consider where (and when) someone first experiences stability in life and what happens if that stability and sense of control doesn’t happen until late in life. What you change may seem random and inconsequential, it may seem like rounding up the smallest fraction of a number, but take a moment to consider what happened when a certain scientist did that: the results were pure chaos.
Born May 23, 1917, Edward Norton Lorenz was born into a New England family that loved science and logic. His maternal grandfather (Lewis M. Norton) was the professor at the Massachusetts of Technology (MIT) who developed the first four-year undergraduate program in chemical engineering (1888). His father (Edward Henry Lorenz) majored in mechanical engineering (at MIT) and his mother (Grace Peloubet Norton Lorenz, who was born the year before her father introduced his program) loved games – especially chess. In addition to installing and cultivating a love of numbers in Dr. Lorenz, his family also gave him a great appreciation for nature and the outdoors. After receiving a bachelor’s degree in mathematics from Dartmouth College and a master’s degree (also in mathematics) from Harvard, it made sense for Dr. Lorenz to follow in the footsteps of his father and grandfather. So, after working as a weather forecaster in the United States Army Air Corps (during World War II), he went to MIT to earn both a masters and a doctoral degree in meteorology; and then became a professor at MIT.
In the 1950’s, Edward Norton Lorenz began to doubt that the accepted method of forecasting weather, based on linear statistical models, was appropriate and/or logical since the method did not reflect the outcome. In 1961, while use a simple digital computer (as opposed to a human “computer”) to simulate weather patterns based on 12 different variables, like temperature and wind speed, he decided to re-run some calculations. Only, in the interest of time, he started in the middle of the story – and ended up with a completely different outcome. When he went through the process to find the “error,” he discovered that while the computer calculated up to six decimal points, the printout rounded up to three decimal points. Ergo, instead of entering something like 0.354148, he had entered (from the printout) 0.345 – and while the difference seems minuscule at first glance, it becomes compounded over time. If you know what you’re looking at, you can see a very definite pattern emerge. However, if you don’t recognize the “Lorenz attractor” at work, then chaos just looks random.
– “By making Samyama on the three sorts of changes comes the knowledge of past and future.”
People often associate chaos theory – the premise that “small changes in initial conditions could result in vast differences in the initial outcomes” – with the “butterfly effect” and science fiction / fantasy stories like Ray Bradbury’s “A Sound of Thunder.” However, as evident by Bradbury’s short story (which was published on June 28, 1952) the overall idea behind chaos theory existed before the scientific discovery made popular by Dr. Lorenz. In fact, it dates back at least as far as 1800. Additionally, it was Dr. Philip Merilees, session chair for the 139th meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, in Washington, D.C, on December 29, 1972, that lifted certain ideas from Dr. Lorenz’s initially untitled speech in order to create the memorable title: “Does the flap of a butterfly’s wings in Brazil set off a tornado in Texas?” That title carried the idea beyond mathematics, physics, computer science, and meteorology and into the social sciences, even into the hearts and minds of people all over the world (who sometimes don’t really understand – or even know – the actual theory).
While fiction writers and readers often get caught up in the fantasy of what happens if we go back in time and accidentally (or intentionally) alter the time-space continuum, remember that Edward Norton Lorenz was looking forward. He was forecasting. So, while we it is interesting and there is some merit to looking back and considering cause-and-effect as it relates to someone’s personal story, there is also fascinating merit to considering what may happen going forward. In other words, we can use the idea of chaos theory to “forecast” situations and possible reactions/responses in someone’s life based on their previous circumstances and reactions/responses. Dr. Lorenz addresses this very idea in The Essence of Chaos where he emphatically argued for believing in free will.
“Before proceeding further, we need to consider the question of free will of human beings, and perhaps of other animate creatures. Most of us presumably believe that the manner in which we will respond to a given set of circumstances has not been predetermined, and that we are free to make a choice. For the sake of argument, let us assume that such an opinion is correct. Our behavior is then a form of randomness in the broader sense; more than one thing is possible next.”
“We must wholeheartedly believe in free will. If free will is a reality, we shall have made the correct choice. If it is not, we shall have still not made an incorrect choice, because we shall not have made a choice at all, not have a free will to do so.”
– quoted from The Essence of Chaos (1993) by Edward Norton Lorenz
I see two problems in Dr. Lorenz’s argument. First, he compares “free will” with “predestination” – as if the two are completely and utterly diametrically opposed and incompatible, which they are as he proposes them (but are not necessarily, philosophically speaking). Second, he outlines a “chaos” model illustrating the quantifiable predictable interaction between the weather, the wind, a tree, and a maple leaf that falls off of the tree (for any number of reasons); but equates human behavior to the flipping of a coin or the shuffling of cards – in other words, a “random” model that does not consider the part that previous behavior, causes, and conditions plays in future decisions.
Eastern philosophies (like Yoga), as well as current events, indicates that we are conditioned to “respond to a given set of circumstances” based on our previous circumstances and our understanding of those circumstances (i.e., our samskaras, layers of mental impressions). In other words, our circumstances and behavior may not be predestined, but they are sometimes predisposed. They can be predisposed because we may not be aware of the multitude of choices available in any given situation. In other words, we may believe we have “no choice” (i.e., no free will) in certain situations and/or believe that we only have “two bad choices. Additionally, even people who see themselves and/or are seen as having a lot of options (and resources) can, in fact, have very narrow views of themselves and the world – based on their samskaras and previous experiences. These narrow viewpoints can lead them to believe that everyone has the same advantages and experiences as them and, therefore, has the same choices – choices they may see as right or wrong.
Therefore (as I stated last year), while I wholeheartedly believe in free will and agree with Dr. Lorenz’s basic premise and overall idealization of free will, I think our behavior might be better described as a form of “random chaos” – in that there are multiple outcomes, but those outcomes are limited by our ability to see the choices within a given situation and the possible outcomes… and our ability to see clearly is limited by the situation and by our previous experiences.
This brings us back to the instructions given to the time travelers in Ray Bradbury’s short story: “‘Stay on the Path. Don’t go off it. I repeat. Don’t go off. For any reason! If you fall off, there’s a penalty.’”
Rather than looking at a time traveling scenario where we go back in time, however, imagine what happens if we look forward. What happens if we consider how our actions today become the circumstances of tomorrow? What happens if we (metaphorically speaking) “get off the path” we’re on in order to create a better future? Whether we are intentional and mindful or not, the steps we take make an impact. So, in what little, subtle, ways can we use our thoughts, words, and deeds to (even our relationships) to create the world – the harvest, the balanced population, and even the social temperament – that we want for ourselves and future generations?
“‘A little error here would multiply in sixty million years, all out of proportion. Of course maybe our theory is wrong. Maybe Time can’t be changed by us. Or maybe it can be changed only in little subtle ways. A dead mouse here makes an insect imbalance there, a population disproportion later, a bad harvest further on, a depression, mass starvation, and finally, a change in social temperament in far-flung countries. Something much more subtle, like that. Perhaps only a soft breath, a whisper, a hair, pollen on the air, such a slight, slight change that unless you looked close you wouldn’t see it. Who knows? Who really can say he knows? We don’t know. We’re guessing. But until we do know for certain…we’re being careful. ’”
– quoted from “A Sound of Thunder” (June 28, 1952) by Ray Bradbury
Sunday’s playlist is available on YouTube and Spotify. [Look for “07112020 An Introduction”]
This is the post Sunday, May 16th. You can request an audio recording of this practice via a comment below or (for a slightly faster reply) you can email me at myra (at) ajoyfulpractice.com.
In the spirit of generosity (“dana”), the Zoom classes, recordings, and blog posts are freely given and freely received. If you are able to support these teachings, please do so as your heart moves you. (NOTE: You can donate even if you are “attending” a practice that is not designated as a “Common Ground Meditation Center” practice, or you can purchase class(es). Donations are tax deductible; class purchases are not necessarily deductible.)
“‘Bhikkhus, I could tell you in many ways about the animal kingdom, so much so that it is hard to find a simile for the suffering in the animal kingdom. Suppose a man threw into the sea a yoke with one hole in it, and the east wind carried it to the west, and the west wind carried it to the east, and the north wind carried it to the south, and the south wind carried it to the north. Suppose there were a blind turtle that came up once at the end of each century. What do you think, bhikkhus [monks]? Would that blind turtle put his neck into that yoke with one hole in it?’
Bhikkhus: ‘He might, venerable sir, sometime or other at the end of a long period.’
‘Bhikkhus, the blind turtle would take less time to put his neck into that yoke with a single hole in it than a fool, once gone to perdition, would take to regain the human state, I say. Why is that? Because there is no practicing of the Dhamma there, no practicing of what is righteous, no doing of what is wholesome, no performance of merit. There mutual devouring prevails, and the slaughter of the weak.’”
– quoted from “The Animal Kingdom” in Majjhima Nikāya 129, Balapandita Sutta: Fools and Wise Men
Don’t ask me why, because I can give you a hundred reasons, but I always seem to “mis-remember” a certain Buddhist story. I mix up the details of the story – I have heard that other teachers (greater teachers than me) do the same. In my case, the blind turtle becomes a dolphin who likes to play; another teacher makes the piece of driftwood a golden ring, heavy enough to sink down to the bottom of the sea (only to get churned back up again). Additionally, I have heard others say that the convergence of the ring and the sea creature happens every hundred years, every thousand years, every five billion years, or a kalpa (based on Hindu and/or some Buddhist texts). But, be all that as it may, the purpose of the story doesn’t change: it highlights the odds of being born (or reborn) into a human existence and the preciousness of human life. And, just as the purpose of the story doesn’t change, neither does the driving compulsion to tell the story – even when one mixes up the details.
While we are on the subject of details, take a moment to consider the details of your life. Consider your unique experiences, thoughts, words, deeds, and relationships. Back in 2016, Dr. B. B. Cael, who was then a graduate student in the MIT-WHOI Joint Program (Massachusetts Institute of Technology and The Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution), calculated that the probability of a blind sea turtle randomly rising up so that it’s head poked through a hole in a piece of drift wood was 7.2 x 10^-16 and the probability of a human being (who is going to be reincarnated) coming back as another human was 6.5 x 10^-16. Now, all of that is just random – without any consideration to specific details like in which body of water the creature rise or what month or what year. Imagine if you will, the probability of you… or me…or anyone we know actually existing as we do. It is miraculous and magnificent!
When I consider how magnificent and miraculous it all is, it reinforces my belief that we are all here for a purpose: a divine purpose. Or, at the very least, that our lives should have a purpose; that we should live a purpose-driven life.
“Find your struggle, learn your lesson, and then know your purpose.”
– a “Monaism” (saying by Mona Miller, as quoted by Seane Corn)
Mona Miller was the teacher of one of my teachers, Seane Corn. Like me, like Seane, like pretty much every teacher who regularly guides a group of people, Mona had things she was known for saying. Her students called those sayings, Monaisms, and the one above reminds me of Marcus Aurelius’ stoic belief that the obstacle is the way. It is also a perfect recipe for being driven and staying driven. After all, we all have struggles, strife, challenges, discomfort, suffering, and disease – and we all want (and deserve) relief from that which ails us. If we take a moment, just a moment, to reflect on what ails us we start to realize four very salient facts:
We are not the only person suffering.
Someone else has, is, and will suffer as we are suffering.
How we deal with our suffering can alleviate suffering or cause more suffering (in ourselves and others).
How we deal with our suffering can inspire others as they deal with their suffering.
“Sanklapa goes beyond just intention. Sankalpa truly cares for the impact.”
– Embrace Yoga’s Roots: Courageous Ways to Deepen Your Practice by Susanna Barkataki
Our ritual of setting an intention and “dedicating” our practice is similar to the Buddhist tradition of “dedicating of the merit” and is rooted in the fifth niyama (“internal observation”), Īśvarapraņidhāna, which is offering our efforts back to the source. The underlying idea in these practices is the very definition of karma yoga as outlined in The Bhagavad Gita (2.31 – 2.51): that we should do our best and work without desire, because the work we do is our “personal duty in life (one’s sva-dharma).”
On Saturday, we go a little deeper by practicing with a sankalpa. The Sanskrit word can be translated into English as “will,” “determination,” and “(the highest) vow.” However, as Susanna Barkataki points out, there is no English word that encompasses the complete and true meaning. Part of the problem with the English translations is that we don’t have one word for something that simultaneously compels us, fuels us, and motivates us. We don’t have an English word for something that consciously embed so deeply into our fiber that it unconsciously starts determining how we live, think, speak, and act. Even “purpose” has to be “driven.”
Of course, these practices require a certain level of trust, a certain level of faith, or – at the very least – a certain level of hopeful desire that what benefits us will also benefit others. One way I frame this is to think of each of us is being like every hero in every culture’s hero’s journey. Accordingly, our work in the world will result in a boon that benefits the world. This is true whether we look at our life (and life purpose) through the lens of our occupation, vocation, and/or avocation. This is true whether we have all the advantages or all the disadvantages. This is true whether people expect us to succeed or whether we are viewed as the underdog. Either way, how we show up in the world matters, because we matter.
“That grain of salt You talk about Gets bigger and bigger each day It’s making a pearl Inside my heart With layer and layers of tears I’d give you this pearl To save our hearts”
– quoted from the song “Grain of Salt” by John Doe
I have a lot of favorite metaphors about how we can deal with hardship and challenges. One of my favorites is what happens when an oyster, clam, or other shelled mollusks gets a bit of salt, sand, or debris inside of its shell. Since the mollusk doesn’t have fingers and opposable thumbs it can use to root around and remove the irritating object, it begins to lave the object with its natural secretion. Over and over again, the shell creature coats the object until it is smooth (and iridescent) and no longer irritating. The end result is something we humans often find valuable.
Of course, I’m going to discourage anyone from getting an actual pearl to remind them of this metaphor, because it is (in a practical sense) an imperfect metaphor. While the mollusk finds a non-violent way to end its suffering, the harvesting of the pearl (especially in a commercial sense) usually requires killing the shelled creature. In the case of cultured pearls, someone intentionally places the irritating object in the shell (hence causing suffering) and then kills the mollusk or, if it can be “irritated” again, places it back in the water to go through more suffering. Hence why, when I use the metaphor, I focus more on what the mollusk has to teach us than what we teach ourselves.
It is, however, important to remember that we are teaching ourselves. In other words, we are teaching each other. The way we think, speak, act, and live our lives is a lesson to others – and especially to the children around us. I know there are a lot of celebrities who consistently proclaim that they are not role models. Yet, each of us is a living example; each of us is modeling behavior – and the children around us are watching and learning. They are learning from their parents, grandparents, their teachers, their coaches, their neighbors, their world leaders, and the siblings of all of the above. They are also learning from each other. And what is more important than the words someone tells them is the lived example that they observe.
“Pighla de zanjeerein [Melt the shackles]
Bana unki shamsheerein [and make swords out of them]
Kar har maidaan fateh o bandeya [Win every battlefield, overcome all your limitations/restrictions”]
– quoted from the song “Kar Har Maidaan Fateh” by Shreya Ghoshal and Sukhwinder Singh
The 2018 film Sanju is based on the real life story of a Bollywood actor, Sanjay Dutt (portrayed by Ranbir Kapoor). Called “Sanju” by his mother, the actor experienced a series of personal crises intertwined with political crises and a downward spiral that resulted in him dealing with his losses, challenges, and conflicts in the some of the most dysfunctional/afflicted ways possible. He turned to drugs and alcohol, and became addicted – which, of course, led to more suffering. In a song that is featured in the movie, and in the associated video, Manisha Koirala appears as a vision of Nargis, Sanju’s mother, encouraging him to live a better life.
In keeping with the language found in many sacred texts from Asia, the song, “Kar Har Maidaan Fateh” refers to one’s struggles, challenges, and suffering as “shackles” or “chains.” The song instructs one to turn the very things that could defeat us into something that can help us overcome our struggles and win our personal battles. It speaks of the power of determination so strong that it overcomes bad luck; climbing onto “clouds of adversity” and grabbing “the collar of the difficult tough times – all in order to become special and “separate from the ordinary crowd.” The song specifically refers to “swords” (and even what can be accomplished with a “broken sword”), but consider other tools that one can use to overcome adversity.
Remember, Edward Bulwer-Lytton said, “The pen is mightier than the sword.” Remember the power of a sharp mind and what happens when you make your mind up to do something. Remember, too, that once a lesson is learned it continues to serve.
“If all the world is a classroom and every day of life is a lesson, then certainly your profession and workplace are included.
After all, He has unlimited ways to provide your livelihood, but He chose to direct you to this way of life.
What sparks of divine wisdom await you here?”
– quoted from Hayom Yom*, 9 Iyar
(*lit. “From Day to Day”); an anthology of aphorisms and customs, arranged according to the days of the year, assembled from the talks and letters of Rabbi Yosef Yitzchak of Lubavitch (1880-1950), sixth Lubavitch Rebbe; compiled by Rabbi Menachem Mendel Schneerson, seventh Lubavitch Rebbe. “Iyar” is the eighth month of the civil year and the second month of the Jewish religious year, based on the Hebrew calendar.
“Yo soy yo y mi circunstancia, y si no la salvo a ella no me salvo yo.”
[“I am I and my circumstance, and if I don’t save it I don’t save myself.”]
— quoted from Meditaciones del Quijote [Don Quixote Mediations] by José Ortega y Gasset
Thank you to everyone who supported the 8th annual Kiss My Asana yogathon. Mind Body Solutions made their goal (Woohooo!!!) and, as always, I am grateful for everyone that did yoga, shared yoga, and helped others.
“Dikhla de zinda hai tu [Show to everyone that you are still alive]
Baaqi hai tujhme hausla [and there is courage left in you…]”
“Tooti shamsheerein toh kya [So what if your sword is broken]
Tooti shamsheeron se hee [Even with this broken sword]
Kar har maidan fateh [Win all the battlefields…]”
“Teri koshishein hee kaamyaab hongi [your attempts, efforts will be successful]
Jab teri ye zidd aag hogi [when your insistence, attempts would turn into a burning desire]
Phoonk de na-umeediyan, na-umeediyan [Burn down all the hopeless, negativeness…]”
– quoted from the song “Kar Har Maidaan Fateh” byShreya Ghoshal and Sukhwinder Singh (with English translations)
This is the “missing” post for Saturday, May 15th. You can request an audio recording of this practice via a comment below or (for a slightly faster reply) you can email me at myra (at) ajoyfulpractice.com.
In the spirit of generosity (“dana”), the Zoom classes, recordings, and blog posts are freely given and freely received. If you are able to support these teachings, please do so as your heart moves you. (NOTE: You can donate even if you are “attending” a practice that is not designated as a “Common Ground Meditation Center” practice, or you can purchase class(es). Donations are tax deductible; class purchases are not necessarily deductible.)
“Curiously, many effects that science cannot explain are generally not regarded as paranormal. In psychology, for example, there are some remarkable but completely unexplained phenomena such as photographic memory (the ability to remember images in perfect detail), lightning calculation in autistic savants (the ability to perform mental arithmetic with astonishing speed and accuracy), extraordinary musical aptitude in prodigies who seem to spring from the womb ready for Carnegie Hall, and so on.
Perhaps the most widely accepted, yet totally baffling, phenomenon is conscious awareness itself….”
– quoted from “1 – What is Psi?” in The Conscious Universe: The Scientific Truth of Pyschic Phenomena by Dean Radin, PhD
“This may seem odd, but that is not my fault.”
– quoted from “25 – Nietzsche” in (Book 3, Modern Philosophy) of History of Western Philosophy by Bertrand Russell (3rd Earl Russell, OM FRS)
It’s always a little weird, even awkward when it happens. It’s also a little cool. Someone, a teacher – a yoga teacher perhaps – takes one look at you and seems to know exactly what you need physically, mentally, even emotionally, energetically, and spiritually. The weird (and awkward part) is when they say something that sounds like they’ve been eavesdropping on your life, reading your mind, and/or following you around to see all the things you do. Or don’t do. It can be weird, awkward; even cool sometimes. And while it may seem mystical, magical – even supernatural – it’s not. It’s not mind reading (as Patanjali is quick to point out) and neither is it clandestine. It’s just supernormal.
If they know what they’re seeing (and hearing), a teacher, a physical therapist, a massage therapist, a doctor, even a coach can look at your posture and gain some insight into you and even your life. I have seen a teacher look at someone in table top and accurately state activities (like gymnastics) that they did as a child. I have seen a teacher observe someone in Downward Facing Dog and accurately describe their mental and emotional state and past experiences that resulted in that mental and emotional state. Almost any of us, if we are really paying attention, can know something is a little off when we watch someone we know fairly well walk into a room. We may also be able to tell when something is really working for them, when they are feeling particularly playful and fearless – even on Zoom.
Sometimes, when I meet a new person “on the mat,” I can pick up information that indicates the kind of yoga they are use to practicing. After all, different traditions have different ways of doing things and when we practice something, we get into certain habits. So, if you are relatively healthy (i.e., not nursing any injuries or major discomfort) and you go into what I would call Parasvokanasana/ Extended Side Angle” when I say “Trikonasana/Triangle,” that information points to a very specific type of yoga. If you go into what I call “Anjaneyasana/Crescent or Anointed Warrior” when I say “Virabhadrasana 1 / Warrior 1,” that also gives me a little information into your practice. If I say “Anjaneyasana” and you immediately go into a kneeling position that gives me even more information.
Again, that’s all well and good when there is nothing holding you back. If, however, I notice you not kneeling during a kneeling pose, I might look to see if I can detect a brace under your pants leg or if you are favoring one leg over the other in other poses. If I see you doing prenatal modifications when you have not previously indicated that you’re pregnant, I might check in with you on the down-low (especially if you’re new to yoga and there’s a possibility you’re just mimicking the pregnant person across the studio from you). Once, I was really thrown off by a new student who seemed to know all the poses and how to get into them, but seemed to lack something I couldn’t quite put my finger on. When we talked after the practice, I learned that prior to our meeting, he had only ever practiced with books – so he was lacking knowledge about much of the internal engagement needed to support the poses. By asking the right questions, we both gained knowledge.
Yoga Sūtra 3.19: pratyayasya para-citta-jñāñam
– “By making samyama on the distinguishing marks of another’s body, one can obtain knowledge of the nature of their mind.”
Yoga Sutra 3.20: na ca tat sālambanam, tasyāvişayībhūtatvāt
– “But not the contents of [their] mind, because that is not the object of the samyama.”
Remembering that biography is in our biology – or, as my dharma-friend Stacy says, “Our issues are in our tissues” – and notice that the above examples are all instances of someone using information they have and applying it to things they are observing. These are essentially examples of putting some of the siddhis (“powers”) unique to being human into action and also harnessing the power of samyama – that applied combination of focus, concentration, and mediation on the body of another person.
There are, obviously, really unwholesome situations in the world where people are profiling other people and, in doing so, applying preconceived notions to what they are observing in a way that creates harm. There are also equally unwholesome examples of people “cold reading” someone in order to manipulate them (also creating harm). Neither of these types of situations is the purpose of this week’s sūtras. In fact, to use samyama in such a way would be contradictory to the practice of yoga.
The commentary is very clear in pointing out that the purpose of this concentrated awareness on another person’s physique and mannerisms really has nothing to do with the other person. Rather it has to do with the observers practice and refers back to Patanjali’s instruction (in Yoga Sūtra 1.33) on cultivating a clear mind by “embracing an attitude of friendliness to those who are happy, compassion to those who are miserable/suffering, happiness to those who are virtuous, and non-judgement to those who are not virtuous.”
But how, you might ask, do you act around someone with a rainbow afro or a cowboy hat, a red nose, a tie-dye shirt, overalls, and a “Nobody for President” button? Well, a person like that must be embraced with conscious “phun.”
“Are you wavy gravy?”
– B. B. King to a “random” person lying on the stage before his set-up (at the Texas International Pop Festival, 09/01/1969)
“Keep your sense of humor, my friend; if you don’t have a sense of humor it just isn’t funny anymore.”
– Wavy Gravy
Born Hugh Nanton Romney on May 15, 1936, the official clown of the Grateful Dead is not related to the political Romney family. However, as an activist for peace and a hippie (not to mention a self-proclaimed “flower geezer”) he has had a hand in politics and even organized a presidential campaign.
Romney and his wife, Jahanara “Jah” Romney, co-founded Hog Farm, America’s longest running hippie commune, in the 1960’s. They first made it onto the world’s radar when volunteers from Hog Farm provided security for the 1st Woodstock Rock Festival (August 15 – 18, 1969). The Hog Farm volunteers called themselves the “Please Force” – as in, “Please don’t do that, please do this instead.” While providing similar service at the Texas International Pop Festival (09/01/1969), Romney met B. B. King,* who gave him the name “Wavy Gravy.”
Wavy Gravy, co-founded the Phurst Church of Phun, a secret society of comics and clowns dedicated to ending the Vietnam War, because he thought activists dressed as clowns would be less likely to be arrested. In 1980, he ran a “Nobody for President” campaign that included a November 4th rally across from the White House. The campaign “staff” of Yippies (from the Youth International Party) and anarchists mostly promoted the “none of the above” option on the ballot. However, the campaign was known for slogans like “Nobody’s Perfect;” “Nobody Keeps All Promises;” “Nobody Should Have That Much Power;”and “Who’s in Washington right now working to make the world a safer place? Nobody!” He also proclaimed that “Nobody makes apple pie better than Mom. And Nobody will love you when you’re down and out.”
“If you don’t change, you’re dead, so I try to keep changing.”
– Wavy Gravy
Wavy Gravy also founded Camp Winnarainbow (in 1975), which is a “socially minded, justice focused organization” dedicated to “[doing] something good for a change.” Part of the Hog Farm community, Camp Winnarainbow offers Day Camps; 3-year Teen Leadership Programs (for ages 15, 16, and 17); Residential Camps (for ages 7 – 14); and scholarships (some of which used to be funded by proceeds of Ben and Jerry’s “Wavy Gravy” ice cream). While they did have to cancel some programming last year (for the first time in 45 years), Camp Winnarainbow was able to move some programs online and safely continue some of their outdoor programming. The programs are committed to “Big Fun” as well as equity, inclusion, and interdependence – not only in theory, but also in practice. Some of the graduates of the Teen Leadership Programs are preparing to take on leadership roles at for future camps and programming.
In 1978, Wavy Gravy and Jahanara Romney joined Dr. Larry Brilliant, Dr. Girija Brilliant, Dr. Nicole Grasset, Ram Dass, and Dr. G. Venkataswamy in co-founding the Seva Foundation. The Brilliants’ had successfully helped eradicate smallpox and were looking for a new initiative. Knowing that over a billion people live with unaddressed vision impairments; that hundreds of millions of underserved people need ongoing eye care; and that 90% of all vision impairment can be prevented or cured, the Seva Foundation grew out of the belief that restoring sight is one of the most effective ways to relieve suffering and reduce poverty. The global non-profit eye organization works with local communities around the world to train local eye-care providers and develop self-sustaining programs that preserve and restore sight.
The Seve Foundation’s name comes from the Indian concept of “self-less service.” The organization provides critical eye care to underserved communities (especially women, children, and indigenous populations) and has provided surgeries, eyeglasses, medicine, and other eye care services to over 44 million people in over 20 countries – including Tibet, Nepal, Cambodia, Bangladesh, Sub-Sahara Africa, and the United States.
Annual benefits for Camp Winnarainbow and the Seva Foundation include some of the same musicians that appeared at the Woodstock Festivals: the Grateful Dead, Bonnie Raitt, Jackson Browne, David Crosby and Graham Nash, Susan Tedeschi and Derek Trucks, Ani DiFranco, Ben Harper, Elvis Costello, Michael Franti and Spearhead, Sly and the Family Stone – and, of course, the Woodstock Festivals Master of Ceremonies, Wavy Gravy.
“We are all the same person trying to shake hands with our self.”
*NOTE: B. B. King passed away May 14, 2015. Rest in power, king!
Errata: If you were on Zoom on Saturday and/or practice with the recording, you will note that I made some naming errors. Some of which I have corrected above. Unfortunately, it occurred to me, a little too late, that I don’t know the whole history behind Jordan Romney distancing himself from his birth name and could have been more diligent about my research before dropping that “fun fact” in the practice. My apologies; I meant no disrespect.
### “DARE TO STRUGGLE, DARE TO GRIN” ~ Wavy Gravy (giving you a preview of Sunday’s practice) ###
Happy New Year! Many blessings to those observing Lent!
[This is the post for Tuesday, February 23rd. You can request an audio recording of Tuesday’s practice via a comment below or (for a slightly faster reply) you can email me at myra (at) ajoyfulpractice.com.
In the spirit of generosity (“dana”), the Zoom classes, recordings, and blog posts are freely given and freely received. If you are able to support these teachings, please do so as your heart moves you. (NOTE: You can donate even if you are “attending” a practice that is not designated as a “Common Ground Meditation Center” practice, or you can purchase class(es). Donations are tax deductible; class purchases are not necessarily deductible.
“Some could think that if turning back is so bad it would be better never to begin but to remain outside the castle. I have already told you at the beginning – and the Lord Himself tells you – that anyone who walks in danger perishes in it and that the door of entry to this castle is prayer. Well now, it is foolish to think that we will enter heaven without entering into ourselves, coming to know ourselves, reflecting on our misery and what we owe God, and Him often for mercy.”
– quoted from “The Second Dwelling Places” of The Interior Castle by Saint Teresa of Ávila (Translation by Kieran Kavanaugh, O. C. D. and Otilio Rodriguez, O. C. D.)
If you spend any amount of time with me – on or off the mat, even on or off the blog page – I think it becomes very clear that I am fascinated by human commonalities. I love the way different cultures and different people’s ways of being in the world overlap. Anthropologically speaking, I am fascinated by the things that (I think) come from being human: like the desire for a deeper connection with more than ourselves. It is interesting to note that when it comes to existential questions – that is to say, questions related to our existence – philosophies and religions (even the physical sciences) end up down the same rabbit holes, racing or strolling down the same paths… just sometimes coming at the path from different directions.
It’s kind of like when you walk through a labyrinth with other people, as many of us did on retreat in Minnetonka a little over 4 years ago. In some ways, everyone was on the same path; but, because we were on different parts of the path – walking in different directions, entering and leaving at different times – one’s perspective could easily be that we were on vastly different paths. Also, the perspective was different when you were on the inside versus the outside and/or when you were looking at the practice before you walked the labyrinth versus after you walked it. Then there was the fact that we all came to the retreat and came to the practice from different places and came with different experiences so that our understanding and processing of the shared experience was, in some ways, different. And yet the same.
And yet the same. Because if we learn nothing else from the ancient yogis and mystics from various traditions around the world, it is this: that the deeper you go inside of yourself, the more parallel your journey and experience is to someone else. This is why Joseph Campbell could codify a cycle/journey after studying a hero with a thousand faces. It is why so many philosophical, spiritual, and religious paths have similar elements – and why those paths work after hundreds and thousands of years.
“Remember: If you want to make progress on the path and ascend to the places you have longed for, the important thing is not to think much but to love much, and so to do whatever best awakens you to love.”
– quoted from “The Fourth Dwelling .1.” of The Interior Castle by Saint Teresa of Ávila (New Translation and Introduction by Mirabai Starr)
We all know that if we eat something or drink something, we are going to have to digest that something. We may not understand how physical mechanics, but at an early age we start learning that the body processes what we consume. It absorbs the nutrients it needs and discards the waste/toxins; and when the body doesn’t absorb what it needs and/or doesn’t get rid of the waste/toxins in an efficient manner, we experience physical pain, discomfort, and disease. We know this about what we eat and drink – and, when we think about it, we recognize that this is also true about what we inhale and/or absorb through the skin/tissues.
What we may not always realize is that we are continuously consuming things that we don’t eat, drink, inhale, or absorb through the skin/tissues. The principle of consumption, digestion, absorption, and elimination also applies to things we consume with our minds. In other words, everything we experience (i.e., everything we see, hear, say, think, and do) is something we are consuming and therefore something that must be processed and digested so that we can absorb what we need – what serves us – and eliminate the waste/toxins (that no longer serves us). When we fail to appropriately process what we consume mentally, emotionally, energetically, and spiritually, we can experience (physical) pain and (mental/emotional) suffering – which can be just as excruciating as when we are physically constipated or otherwise debilitated by the things we consume.
The mind-body is designed to find balance. It is designed to convert food into energy and even to store the fuel for those times when we are depleted. It is designed to eliminate toxins and anything that could cease our existence. While the mind-body does so much of what it does to keep us moving without any involvement or conscious thought on our part, there are ways in which we can assist the processes. One way we can assist these processes is to be mindful of what we consume. Of course, since we can’t always control every little thing that we consume, it’s important to keep three key elements in mind: water, rest, and movement.
“Rest and digest,” as well as create, are associated with the parasympathetic nervous system, which is often referred to as the mind-body’s brakes. Of course, the only reason a system needs brakes is if it is in motion (or could be in motion). One of the many reasons movement is important is because the engagement of our muscles serves as the pump for the lymphatic system – which provides nutrients for healthy cells and brushes or washes away dead cells. A combination of tissues, vessels, and organs, the lymphatic system is a crucial part of our immune system – and on the first line of defense against disease.
So, it makes sense that after 11 days of celebrations that involve rich, heavy food and drink, people who celebrate the 15-day Spring Festival as part of the Lunar New Year celebrations need a break before the Lantern Festival that concludes the celebrations. Day 12 is that day of cleansing and resting – and also for getting ready for what’s to come. Under “normal” (i.e., not pandemic) circumstances, most businesses have opened back up and people are back at work. There will still be prayers, offerings, and a remembrance of elders. There might even still be some leftovers. However, for the most part, this is a day when people rest, relax, eat light… and process/digest all that’s happened before.
“… and our body has this defect that, the more it is provided care and comforts, the more needs and desires it finds.”
– quoted from “Chapter X” of The Way of Perfection by Saint Teresa of Ávila
Throughout our physical practice of yoga, we either break up the movement with stillness and quiet (as we do in vinyāsa) or break up the stillness and quiet with movement (as we do with Yin Yoga) – and, even though that looks and feels very different, the path is still about processing, digesting, absorbing, and eliminating what has been consumed. This applies to what has been consumed physically, as well as mentally, emotionally, energetically, and spiritually. While any movement can help someone process what they have consumed, the physical practices of yoga can allow us to be very deliberate and very intentional in the way that assist the digestion process. Again, when I say “digestion” here, I mean the processing of what has been consumed by all the aforementioned methods.
From the outside looking in, the way we move through our vinyāsa practice can seem mysterious, odd, or even magical. However, the deeper we go into the practice (and into ourselves) the more we recognize that there is a science and a system to the movement. We move in a way that exaggerates the mind-body’s natural tendencies while, at the same time, moving through the mind-body-spirit’s symbolic manifestation of our biography. Thus, the poses and the sequences are very intentional ona physical-mental level, as well as a psychic-symbolic level, and an emotional-energetic level. Each practice is, in some ways, intended as a non-alcoholic apértif and digestif; simultaneously something to increase your appetite (for life) and to help you digest what you’ve consumed.
“Before fully uniting himself with her, he fills her with burning desire for him. He does this in such a delicate way that the soul doesn’t understand where her longing comes from, nor could I successfully explain it except to those who already know from experience what I’m saying. These impulses rise from so deep inside that the soul and are so subtle and refined that I can’t find a fitting metaphor to describe them.
This experience is far different from anything we can taste in the world. It is even different from the spiritual delights we have talked about so far.”
– quoted from “The Sixth Dwelling .2.” of The Interior Castle by Saint Teresa of Ávila (New Translation and Introduction by Mirabai Starr)
Tuesdays playlist is available on YouTube and Spotify. [Look for “March 28th Dogs & Castles 2020”]
DON’T FORGET! The next “First Friday Night Special” is March the 5th – at which time, I will encourage you to “give something up” / “let someone go.” Time and additional details are posted on the “class schedules” calendar!
[My apologies for this very late Wednesday the 3rd post. You can request an audio recording of Wednesday’s practices via a comment below or (for a slightly faster reply) you can email me at myra (at) ajoyfulpractice.com.
In the spirit of generosity (“dana”), the Zoom classes, recordings, and blog posts are freely given and freely received. If you are able to support these teachings, please do so as your heart moves you. (NOTE: You can donate even if you are “attending” a practice that is not designated as a “Common Ground Meditation Center” practice, or you can purchase class(es). Donations are tax deductible; class purchases are not necessarily deductible.
Check out the “Class Schedules” calendar for upcoming classes. *** DON’T FORGET THERE’S A “FIRST FRIDAY NIGHT SPECIAL! ***]
“Everyone deserves music, sweet music”
– quoted from the song “Everyone Deserves Music” by Michael Franti & Spearhead
“For years, [Dr. Mike Miller], a research cardiologist, has been studying the effects of happiness — or things that make people happy — on our hearts. He began his research with laughter, and found watching funny movies and laughing at them could actually open up blood vessels, allowing blood to circulate more freely.
Miller thought, if laughter can do that, why not music? So, he tested the effects of music on the cardiovascular system. ‘Turns out music may be one of the best de-stressors — either by playing or even listening to music,’ said Miller.
The setup was basically the same as with the laughter study: Using high-tech imaging, Miller measured blood vessel size as people listened to music.
The results did not surprise Miller. ‘The inner lining of the blood vessel relaxed, opened up and produced chemicals that are protective to the heart,’ he said.
But when participants listened to music they didn’t particularly enjoy, Miller said, ‘the vessels actually began to close up.’”
“But be careful what you listen to. Whether you like Beyoncé or the B-52s, Chopin or Johnny Cash, Miller found that listening repeatedly to the same tune diminished the music’s effects on the body. ‘You just don’t get that boost if you listen to the same song over and over again,’ he said. ‘You need to vary your songs, so when you hear the song fresh, it brings back the sense of joy and opens up the system.’”
– quoted from a 2009 CNN Health segment entitled, “The power of music: It’s a real heart opener” by Val Willingham, CNN Medical Producer
From Dr. Oliver Sacks to Dr. Teppo Särkämö and from Arthur C. Clarke to Friederick Nietzsche, medical practitioners, researchers, authors, philosophers, and anthropologists have shown that music affects us in multiple ways. It can touch our minds and hearts – and change our hearts and brains; it can change our moods; it can tell our stories; and it can affect our bodies on multiple levels. We may not all agree on what we like (or even what constitutes “music”), but it is hard to deny the benefit of music in general.
But, what if there was no music? What if it just stopped, or ceased to be? What if it died?
How long would you carry the music in your heart and your mind? How long would you carry it in the muscles of your body? Would you experience great longing? Would you be inspired to make more music?
I ask these questions not to be overly deep, but because today (February 3rd) is “The Day the Music Died.” It is the day in 1959 when a plane carrying Buddy Holly, Ritchie Valens, and J. P. “The Big Bopper” Richardson crashed just outside of Clear Lake, Iowa. The three stars and the pilot, Roger Peterson, all died in the crash that happened as they were traveling to Moorhead, MN.
The three singers were young and successful. Holly was 22 and a newlywed expecting his first child. Valens was 17. At 28, “The Big Bopper” was the oldest of the three chronologically, but had started writing and singing later than the others. He had already made a name for himself as a Texas DJ and was capitalizing on his earlier success. He had a wife, a daughter, and another child on the way. (Peterson, 21, was also married.) All three of the singers were popular on the charts, had hit singles, and were on the precipice of even more greatness.
The accident happened during the “Winter Dance Party” tour, which featured the three stars plus Buddy Holly’s band, the Crickets, and Dion and the Belmonts. The Crickets, at the time, consisted of Waylon Jennings, Tommy Allsup, and Carl Bunch, with Frankie Sardo has an opener for Holly. Dion and the Belmonts were Dion DiMucci, Angelo D’Aleo, Carlo Mastrangelo, and Fred Milano. In my theatre days, we would have called the tour “snake bit,” but the musicians had a more specific moniker: “the tour from hell.”
“[Holly historian Bill] Griggs, who long ago moved to Holly’s home town of Lubbock, Texas, from Connecticut, estimates they had used five different buses before driving into Clear Lake – ‘reconditioned school buses, not good enough for school kids.’
The tour started in Milwaukee on Friday, Jan. 23, 1959. It then zig-zagged during the next 11 days from Wisconsin to Minnesota to Wisconsin to Minnesota to Iowa to Minnesota to Wisconsin to Iowa to Minnesota.
There were no roadies to help set up and pack up, and only icy two-lane highways to get from town to town.”
– quoted from the February 3, 2009 Star Tribune article entitled, “Buddy Holly: The tour from hell – The story of the long, cold nights on the road before the Day the Music Died, 50 years ago.” by Pamela Huey
Typically on a bus and truck tour, the order of venues is based on proximity, i.e. geographical nearness in space and time. A group might perform more than one show in a day, but those shows would typically be in the same venue. Typically, at least on the tours I did back in the day, the artists have a little down time between being on the road and actually performing (and vice versa), because the crew has to unload, set-up, and then after the performance breakdown and load out. But these things didn’t happen on the “Winter Dance Tour” of 1959.
To add to the abnormality of it all, it was super cold, snowy, icy, and windy. The temperature swung from 20° F (-7° C) to -36° F (-38° C) – and the buses weren’t always heated. At least one bus, the one between the ninth show (in Duluth, MN) and the tenth and eleventh shows (in Appleton and Green Bay, Wisconsin) was not only not heated, it broke down; leaving the musicians stranded on the side of the freezing cold road – trying to stay warm with blankets and a trash bonfire made out of newspapers. Then, they had to perform. Carl Bunch, Buddy Holly’s drum at the time, had frostbite on his feet. J. P. “The Big Bopper” Richardson had the flu. And, to add to all that, Buddy Holly was bickering with his manager.
Everyone was tired, cold, and frustrated – but they still had shows… and the show must go on.
The twelfth show, the show in Clear Lake, Iowa, was not on the original schedule. It was scheduled by Holly’s manager when the musicians arrived in Clear Lake on Monday, February 2nd. Which just added to the headliner’s frustration – especially since the thirteenth show, in Moorhead, MN, would require them to drive 365 miles, passing by the previous two stops along the way. Fed up, Buddy Holly decided to charter a plane from the Iowa venue (the twelfth show) to the next Minnesota stop (the thirteenth show). He was going to cover himself and his band, and was willing to split the cost with any of the other musicians that wanted to skip the road trip, and possibly have time to sleep in some place warm and soft instead of in a cold bus seat).
Dion DiMucci said he couldn’t afford the $36 for him and the Belmonts. He was later quoted as saying that the cost was the same amount as his parents paid in rent in New York; so, ultimately, he couldn’t justify the expense. During the investigation into the crash, DiMucci gave a slightly different explanation of how things transpired than Jennings and Allsup; however, the most accepted sequence of events is that: (1) As an act of compassion, since “The Big Bopper” was so sick, Waylon Jennings gave up his seat to the former DJ. (2) Carl Bunch was in the hospital (because of the frostbite) and would be out until the tour swung back to Iowa on February 5th. (3) Ritchie Valens and Tommy Allsup flipped a coin which, in theory, Allsup lost.
“The next thing I know, Buddy sends me over to get a couple of hot dogs. He’s sitting there in a cane-bottomed chair, and he’s leaning back against the wall. And he’s laughing.
‘Ah,’ he said. ‘You’re not going with me tonight, huh? Did you chicken out?’
I said no, I wasn’t scared. The Big Bopper just wanted to go.
‘Well,’ he said grinning, ‘I hope your damned bus freezes up again.’
I said, ‘Well, I hope your ol’ plane crashes.’
That took me a lot of years to get over. I was just a kid, barely twenty-one. I was about halfway superstitious, like all Southern people, scared of the devil and scared of God equally.
I was afraid somebody was going to find out I said that, and blame me. I knew I said that. I remember Buddy laughing and then heading out to the airport after the show. I was certain I caused it.”
– quoted from “Chapter 2: Buddys” of Waylon: An Autobiography by Waylon Jennings and Lenny Kaye
After the crash, “The Winter Dance” tour went on. Robert Velline (who would make a name for himself as Bobby Vee) was a fifteen-year old singer, songwriter from Fargo, North Dakota, who put together a band called the Shadows, with his older brother and some school friends. They answered a call for talent and performed in Moorhead, MN. Vee would go on to release a single “Suzie Baby” (1959), which was an homage to Buddy Holly’s “Peggy Sue;” release a tribute album (I Remember Buddy Holly (1963); and regularly performed at the Winter Dance Party memorial concerts in Clear Lake, Iowa. Waylon Jennings, Tommy Allsup, and Carl Bunch would all continue, with Jennings eventually singing lead. However, Jennings and Allsup would only continue the tour for two additional weeks. Jennings would ultimately leave Buddy Holly’s guitar and amplifier in a locker at Grand Central Station, and mail the keys to Holly’s widow.
Tragically, María Elena Holly suffered a miscarriage – due to the compounded trauma of losing her husband and finding out about the accident over the radio. Waylon Jenning’s family would also report being traumatized by hearing on the radio that “Buddy Holly and his band had been killed.” Subsequently, public officials decided not to release the names of victims until after the families had been notified.
J. P. “The Big Bopper” Richardson’s son, Jay Perry Richardson, was born two months after the accident. He grew up to become a musician known as “The Big Bopper, Jr.” in honor of his father. For a while, including in 1999, he toured with Jay Mueller, a Buddy Holly impersonator whose tribute show attempted to recreate the 1959 schedule in 1999 (for the 40th anniversary).
“John Mueller, who plays Buddy Holly in a traveling road show called ‘Winter Dance Party,’ has rare insight into what the ’50s performers endured. In 1999, Mueller and the other musicians tried to replicate ’59 tour. It was the 40th anniversary of the plane crash, and he wanted to honor the ’59 tour by going back to the original cities and original venues.
‘By the time we got to Clear Lake, I had lost my voice, I had lost about 10 to 15 pounds, I was just physically exhausted, as was everybody in the group. The grueling nature of the tour, following the exact geographic routing, it really hit me in the head why they chartered the plane,’ said Mueller, whose group traveled in warm, comfortable minivans.”
– quoted from the February 3, 2009 Star Tribune article entitled, “Buddy Holly: The tour from hell – The story of the long, cold nights on the road before the Day the Music Died, 50 years ago.” by Pamela Huey
I asked the questions: But, what if there was no music? What if it just stopped, or ceased to be? What if it died?
But, we know what we would do because people did it. We carry the music in our hearts and minds. We carry it in the muscles of our bodies and in every fiber of our being. We are inspired to make more music, more dance, more poetry, more stories, and even statues.
There have been many songs, books, movies, reenactment concerts, and even a musical written in honor of the musicians and music that were lost in 1959. Perhaps the most famous tribute song about the three stars is Don McLean’s 1971 hit “American Pie” – which established February 3rd as The Day the Music Died. I have been told that Madonna covered the song (but if you’ve never heard the original, you’re missing out).
In April 1959, Tommy Dee recorded “Three Stars,” which offers personal glimpses into the singers’ personality and lives. Eddie Cochran, who was friends with Buddy Holly and Ritchie Valens, actually recorded “Three Stars” before Dee recorded it. Tragically, he would be killed in a car accident while on tour in England. He was the only fatality. (I believe his version of “Three Stars was released posthumously.)
Eddie Cochran’s death resulted in another wave of tribute songs, including Waylon Jennings “The Stage (Stars in Heaven),” which was a tribute to the Holly, Valens, “The Big Bopper,” and Cochran. Interestingly, Buddy Holly arranged for Waylon Jenning’s first recording session in December 1958. During that session, Jenning’s recorded his first single, “Jole Blon” – which is sometimes called “the Cajun national anthem” and is on my playlist for the day. It features Buddy Holly and Tommy Allsup, and would be released in March 1959 – so, in some ways, it is also a tribute.
“In a vision I can see, the stars that meant the world to me Ana din the vision it’s the same as long ago I see a stage beyond compare and all the stars were settled there”
“We’ve had the final curtain call and if you have seen any of my vision at all Then you have truly seen, The greatest show of all”
– quoted from the song “The Stage (Stars in Heaven) by Waylon Jennings
Wednesday’s playlist is available on YouTube and Spotify.
(NOTE: The YouTube playlist has the Tommy Dee version of “Three Stars” during the practice and the Eddie Cochran version in the before/after music. The Spotify playlist has Cochran’s version during the practice and Charlie Gracie’s song “I’m Alright,” a tribute to Eddie Cochran, in the before/after music.)
“Look up in the sky Up toward the North There are three new stars Brightly shining forth
They’re shining so bright From Heaven above Gee, we’re gonna miss you Everybody sends their love”
– quoted from the song “Three Stars” by Tommy Dee
IT’S TIME! During tonight’s “First Friday Night Special” (7:15 – 8:20 PM, CST) we will be “observing the conditions” of the heart. This practice is open and accessible to all. Additional details are posted on the “Class Schedules” calendar! The relevant post is coming.
A Joyful Practice 