Consider What’s Upstream (playlist update) August 22, 2020
Posted by ajoyfulpractice in Music.add a comment
My apologies for the playlist confusion. If you are an email subscriber, here is the playlist for today’s practice on YouTube and Spotify. (This is the “07112020 An Introduction” playlist.) The original post has been updated and I will send out the audio recording in the next hour.
### PEACE ###
qaStaH nuq (“What’s happening?”) August 19, 2020
Posted by ajoyfulpractice in Uncategorized.Tags: Alexander Courage, Chris Pine, Gene Rodenberry, James Tiberius Kirk, Klingon, music, Odo, Philosophy T. Farnsworth, Rene Auberjonois, Salome Jens, Science Fiction, Television, Vedas, William Shatner, yoga philosophy
5 comments
“Captain’s Log, Star Date 2263.2. Today is our 966th day in Deep Space, a little under 3 years into our 5-year mission. The more time we spend out here there harder it is to tell where one day ends and the next one begins. It can be a challenge to feel grounded when even gravity is artificial. But, while we do what we can to make it feel like home.
The crew, as always, continues to act admirably despite the rigors of our extended stay here in outer space, and the personal sacrifices they’ve made. We continue to search for new life forms in order to establish firm diplomatic ties. Our extended time in unchartered territory has stretched the ship’s mechanical capacities, but fortunately, our engineering department – led by Mr. Scott – is more than up to the job. The ship aside, prolonged cohabitation has definitely had affects on interpersonal dynamics; some experiences for better and some for the worse.
As for me, things have started to feel… a little episodic. The farther out we go, the more I find myself wondering what it is we’re trying to accomplish. If the universe is truly endless, then are we not forever striving for something forever out of reach?”
– quoted from Star Trek Beyond (2016), voiced by Chris Pine (b. 08/26/1980) as Captain James Tiberius Kirk
Ever feel like you’re in the middle of an episode of Star Trek? Or maybe a scene from one of the movies where things are not only NOT going according to plan, they’re not even going in a way you ever anticipated. You’re like, “qaStaH nuq jay (What the bleep is happening?)” It’s been 157 days since I taught an in-studio class. Even when I imagined having more online engagement, occasional pop-up classes, and students from all over the world attending my classes, I never imagined the sequence of events that have led to our current reality. I mean, who could have imagined the world would come to this…oh, wait! – Scientists, engineers, even computer moguls anticipated exactly this! While we can’t go back and listen we can go forward, listen, explore, and consider how we come together in peace. Star Trek has its roots in ancient Indian philosophy. So, as we go forward, we also go back.
Today is the anniversary of the birth Philo T. Farnsworth and Gene Roddenberry. Born today in 1906, Farnsworth was an American inventor who revolutionized television. He started exploring mechanical and electrical engineering at the age of twelve and by the age of fifteen had developed the principle of the image dissector that would make an all-electric television possible. His work contributed to the television tube that was used in all television up until the late 20th century. He also developed the “image oscillate,” a cathode ray tube that displayed the images captured by the image dissector and was the first person to publically demonstrate a fully functional and all-electronic television.
Roddenberry, born today in 1921, revolutionized what we watch on television. A World War II veteran and former police officer (whose father was also an LAPD officer), Roddenberry became a freelance script writer for television who drew from his experiences as a combat pilot and member of law enforcement. While he had success working on shows created by others, he couldn’t seem to get his own creations to take off. At one point, in the late 1950’s/early 1960’s, he was asked to write a series set in 1860’s Mississippi – only without any Black people. Roddenberry argued about the premise so much that he lost the job. But it was during this pivotal time in his career, however, that he became a producer and “met” some of the people who would become important in his life: including Majel Barrett (then known as Majel Leigh Hudec), DeForest Kelley, Leonard Nimoy, Nichelle Nichols, Gene L. Coon, Gary Lockwood, Joe D’Agosta, Philip Pike, Edward Jellicoe, and James T. Irvine.
“Space – the final frontier. These are the voyages of the starship Enterprise. Its five-year mission – to explore strange new worlds – to seek out new life and new civilizations – to boldly go where no man has gone before.”
– Opening monologue from the original Star Trek series, voiced by William Shatner as Captain James T. Kirk
Roddenberry originally intended Star Trek to be a science fiction version of spaghetti westerns. Only when he pitched it, he downplayed the science fiction aspect and highlighted how similar the series would be to successful shows like Gunsmoke and Wagon Train. In fact, he called it “Wagon Train to the stars.” After pitching the series to a number of studios, including Lucille Ball’s Desilu (where he was hired as a producer), Rodenberry received a deal to produce the script “The Menagerie” (known as “The Cage”) and three other episodes. He immediately hired Dorothy Fontana (known as D. C. Fontana) as his assistant, making Star Trek one of the most diverse shows on television before it even aired.
Even though it didn’t do well with test audiences, the original series ran for three seasons (79 episodes) and create a franchise that now includes six additional television series, thirteen feature films, an extensive collection of books, games, and toys – not to mention college curriculum and language courses. It’s a cult classic that has greatly influenced popular culture.
“First of all, our show did not reach and affect all these people because it was deep and great literature. Star Trek was not Ibsen or Shakespeare. To get a prime time show–a network show–on the air and to keep it there, you must attract and hold a minimum of 18 million people every week. You have to do that in order to move people away from Gomer Pyle, Bonanza, Beverly Hillbillies, and so on. And we tried to do this with entertainment, action, adventure, conflict, and so on.
But once we got on the air, and within the limits of those action/adventure limits, we did not accept the myth that the television audience has an infantile mind. We had an idea, and we had a premise, and we still believe that. As a matter of fact we decided to risk the whole show on that premise. We believed that the often ridiculed mass audience is sick of this world’s petty nationalism and all its old ways and old hatreds, and that people are not only willing but anxious to think beyond those petty beliefs that have for so long kept mankind divided.
So you see that the formula, the magic ingredient, that many people keep seeking, and many of them keep missing, is really not in Star Trek, it is in the audience. There is an intelligent life form out on the other side of that television tube!
The whole show was an attempt to say that humanity will reach maturity and wisdom on the day that it begins not just to tolerate, but to take a special delight in differences in ideas and differences in life forms. We tried to say that the worst possible thing that can happen to all of us is for the future to somehow press us into a common mold, where we begin to act and talk and look and think alike. If we cannot learn to actually enjoy those small differences, take a positive delight in those small differences between our own kind here on this planet, then we do not deserve to go out into space and meet the diversity that is almost certainly out there.
And I think that this is what people responded to.”
– quoted from a 1976 philosophy lecture by Gene Roddenberry
I am a Star Trek fan, you might even call me a Trekkie. Although, in all honesty, my favorite episodes and characters are ones that (ironically) diverge slightly from the way Roddenberry wanted the Star Trek universe to be portrayed. Gene Roddenberry was a humanist, who questioned religion and his religious upbringing. He wanted to show, not tell, and wrote accordingly. So, while I personally find the original James T. Kirk misogynistic, sexist, and a little racist, no one can deny that Rodenberry intentionally portrayed diversity and equality among races, genders, ethnicities – and even species. And, I happen to like the episodes and movies where that diversity, equality, and spirituality is front and center.
The series continues to be so spiritually infused that members of various religions uplift it – sometimes without realizing that many of its foundational elements hail from the Vedic (Indian philosophy) tradition. In fact, Roddenberry was rewarded by the American Baptist Convention and spent years corresponding with John M. Gunn of the National Council of Churches – until Roddenberry explained “But you must understand that I am a complete pagan, and consume enormous amounts of bread, having found the Word more spice than nourishment….” He said he believed in God, “just not other people’s God” and called Catholicism “a beautiful religion” even as he railed against organized religion as people’s malfunctioning substitute brain. Perhaps one of the reasons he wanted to subtly allude to spirituality was not only because of his beliefs as a humanist, but also because of the way he saw the American public’s double standard when it came to certain religions: condemning violent acts committed by members of a religion different from theirs while simultaneously praising and/or accepting violent acts committed by members of their shared religion. So, Rodenberry gave us the spirit rather than the religion.
“Odo: When you return to the Link, what will become of the entity I am talking to right now?
The Female Founder: The drop becomes the ocean.
Odo: And, if you choose to take solid form again?
The Female Founder: The ocean becomes a drop.
Odo: Ah, yes, I think I’m beginning to understand.
The Female Founder: Then you can answer your own question.”
– quoted from Star Trek: Deep Space Nine conversation between the Odo (played by René Auberjonois) and the Female Changeling / Founder (played by Salome Jens)
Please join me today (Wednesday, August 19th) at 4:30 PM or 7:15 PM for a yoga practice on Zoom, where we will boldly go where only you can go. 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.
Wednesday’s (Courage filled) playlist is available on YouTube and Spotify.
This interview appears on YouTube playlist.
### bISeH’eghlaH’be’chugh latlh Dara’laH’be‘ ###
Consider What’s Downstream August 15, 2020
Posted by ajoyfulpractice in Uncategorized.Tags: antiracism, avidyā, Ibram X. Kendi, J. Krishnamurti, Pandit Rajmani Tigunait, Racism, Shunryu Suzuki Roshi, vidya, yoga, yoga philosophy, yoga practice, Yoga Sutra, Yoga Sutra 2.33
1 comment so far
“Life is like stepping into a boat that is about to sail out to sea and sink.”
– Shunryu Suzuki Roshi
Just for a moment, set aside the sinking boat analogy and consider being in a row (or paddle) boat that is floating around an eddy. Let’s say this river and eddy are big enough that we don’t automatically recognize that we’re going around in circles. In this scenario, there are times and places where the eddy’s current is strong, actively carrying us in a certain direction (which is, by definition, not the direction the river flows). When we seem to be going the way we want to go, we may not notice the strength of the current; and happily paddle along. We go with the flow even when it gets dangerous. Sure, when the water gets choppy and we discover we are headed towards the center of the whirlpool, we may think, “Oh, maybe this wasn’t such a good idea,” but at that point we may not have the strength or the skill to head towards shore. Then there are times and places when we feel like we are stronger than the current. It’s still there, and still capable of pulling us in a certain direction; however, in those moments when the current feels dormant we may be completely unaware that there is anything influencing our movement other than our own paddle, will, and determination. Finally, there are times and places where the current is moderate, just strong and active enough that we are aware of the effort it takes to paddle and move in any given direction away from the center of the whirlpool. In fact, this may be the only time we recognize what’s happening beneath the surface and the only time we actively work to move in the opposite direction.
Yoga Sūtra 2.33: vitarkabādhane pratipakşabhāvanam
— “When troublesome thoughts prevent the practice (of yamās and niyamās), cultivate the opposite thoughts.”
At the very beginning of the Yoga Sūtra, Patanjali explains that when the mind is quiet/undisturbed, the practitioner “rests in their own true nature” (YS 1.3) and that at all other times we “rest” or identify with the fluctuations of our mind (YS 1.4). Furthermore, throughout the first part of the sūtras and the first part of the practice, we start to notice the minds tendency to fluctuate in ways that are dysfunctional/afflicted and therefore cause suffering. The (external) restraints and (internal) observations provide a method of practice that cultivates functional/not-afflicted thoughts and habits. But the practice is not a magical spell. The effect is not instantaneous or overnight, and so we will encounter obstacles (YS 1.30), the negative effects which are caused by the obstacles (YS 1.31), the 28 types of disempowerment (YS 2.24), and continued suffering.
This is the whirlpool – and it is caused by the (cross) current which is our dysfunctional/ afflicted thoughts patterns, which flow from the river of ignorance. Yes, once again, it all comes back to avidyā. The thing we have to remember is that those five afflicted types of thoughts are always at play, underneath the surface, and that they always end in the ugly blossom that is fear. (YS 2.3)
“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, is understanding fear; that means, watch it, learn about it, come directly into contact with it, not how to escape from it, not how to resist it.”
— Jiddu Krishnamurti
Typically when I teach the second week in August, there is a focus on fear and being fearless. Of course, I quotes the Roosevelts and Alfred Hitchcock (b. 08/13/1899), but I also quote J. Krishnasmurti whose advice regarding fear is not about being reckless, but about getting to the place where we understand fear and what is beyond fear: wisdom.
Remember, fear is an emotional reaction to a perceived threat. The emotional reaction causes a physiological response: it activates the sympathetic nervous system. It causes a chemical change in the brain and a change in organ function, both designed to protect you and ensure survival. This can all take place in a blink of an eye and in a heartbeat – even when the perceived threat turns out to not to be a threat and/or not a threat to your survival. While this can all take place in an instant, it takes a while to come down off of the adrenaline high and, depending on the reality and nature of the threat, the effects of the trauma can be life-long.
In the Eastern philosophies, the opposite of fear is wisdom. Wisdom being the ability, knowledge, and skill to respond to a given situation with awareness. Without wisdom, we react as if everything and everyone is a threat to our life, our livelihood, and those we love. We see it each and every day, even when we don’t recognize that that is what we are seeing/experiencing. Wisdom, in this case, can also be defined as vidyā (“correct knowledge”) about ourselves and the nature of everything. Wisdom, when it comes to our whirlpool analogy, gives us the awareness, skill, and strength to paddle against the swirling current that is taking us into dangerous waters.
“However, if the process of non-violence is to be effective in counteracting violence, we must first describe and outline it clearly and methodically. Because violent thoughts always precede a violent act, an act of non-violence will be effective only if it is preceded by non-violent thoughts. Violence is an active phenomenon, whereas non-violence is mistakenly thought to be passive – simply the absence of violence. But passive non-violence has no power to extinguish the fire if violence. Non-violence must be as active as violence itself.”
— commentary on Yoga Sūtra 2.33 from The Practice of the Yoga Sutra: Sadhana Pada by Pandit Rajmani Tigunait, PhD
“The opposite of racist isn’t ‘not racist.’ It is ‘anti-racist.’ What’s the difference? One endorses either the idea of a racial hierarchy as a racist, or racial equality as an anti-racist. One either believes problems are rooted in groups of people, as a racist, or locates the roots of problems in power and policies, as an anti-racist. One either allows racial inequities to persevere, as a racist, or confronts racial inequities, as an anti-racist. There is no in-between safe space of ‘not racist.'”
— quoted from How to Be an Antiracist by Ibram X. Kendi, PhD
The first time I heard about Ibram X. Kendi (b. 08/13/1982) and his book How to Be an Antiracist, I thought the term “antiracist” was something new. In reality, however, Dr. Kendi recommends and teaches an idea that goes back to the beginning of the yoga philosophy. (NOTE: I’m not saying he’s teaching “yoga,” even though he is working to bring people together. I’m saying he is teaching ancient wisdom.) It is not simply bringing awareness to a situation and neither is it not doing something overtly harmful. It is bringing awareness to what is happening beneath the surface and actively, skillfully moving in the opposite direction. Over time, we neutralize the force of eddy’s current. Our habits and our thoughts change. When our habits and thoughts change, the world changes.
In commentary for this week’s sūtra, Pandit Rajmani Tigunait, PhD, includes a gentle reminder (see below) to put things perspective. You may think of it as a mantra and I would suggest we all need something like it. We all need something that stops us in our tracks, makes us breath, and really take a look at which way we are headed.
It’s like the dharma talk I heard once, where the teacher equated strong emotions to getting on train: sometimes you buy your ticket, get on board, and realize you’re going in the wrong direction. Sure, you can get off, buy another ticket… but, now you’re upset – and there’s a good chance the second train (while going in a different direction) is still headed the wrong way. So, you need a little internal guidance, a map or ticket to discernment.
You may have your own, maybe something you discovered in the “Spiritual Exercises” of Saint Ignatius of Loyola (whose feast day is 07/31) or maybe something you saw or heard as the Berlin Wall was coming down. Maybe it’s a word or a lyric from a song. But, you could also use all or part of this:
“Now I’m allowing myself to lose my inner peace and happiness. This is a much greater loss than losing a portion of my material wealth. Furthermore, such occurrences are commonplace. Everyone has strengths and weaknesses. In worldly matters I will do what needs to be done, but never at the cost of losing the pristine nature of my mind. I must adhere to the higher virtues of my heart.”
— commentary on Yoga Sūtra 2.33 from The Practice of the Yoga Sutra: Sadhana Pada by Pandit Rajmani Tigunait, PhD
Consider practicing today and tomorrow with those last two lines in your head and in your heart. Consider what it means to pursue your goals, with will and determining AND a clear head. Consider what it means to listen to and then follow your heart.
I have cancelled classes today and tomorrow (Saturday, August 15th and Sunday, August 16th). If you’re looking for one of my “fearless play with [jazz]” practices, check out April 25th or 29th. (I can we email you by Sunday afternoon if you request a recording.)
“Definitions anchor us in principles. This is not a light point: If we don’t do the basic work of defining the kind of people we want to be in language that is stable and consistent, we can’t work toward stable, consistent goals.”
“Like fighting an addiction, being an antiracist requires persistent self-awareness, constant self-criticism, and regular self-examination.”
— quoted from How to Be an Antiracist by Ibram X. Kendi, PhD
### ROW ROW ROW YOUR BOAT ###
Observe Where You Are (and keep notes) August 10, 2020
Posted by ajoyfulpractice in Uncategorized.Tags: Alice Everett, Annie Maunder, Annie Russell, Edith Mary Rix, Edmond Halley, Ferdinand Magellan, Greenwich Mean, Harriet Maud Furniss, insight, Isabella Jane Clemes, James Smithson, John Flamsteed, King Charles II, meridians, Prime Meridian, Royal Observatory Greenwish, Sir Isaac Newton, Smithsonian Institute, yoga practice
add a comment
“Every man is a valuable member of society, who by his observations, researches, and experiments, procures knowledge for men.”
– James Smithson (quoted from his notebook)
Insight, which can be viewed as “seeing something in a special way,” can be cultivated through observation. If you think about it in this way, then any knowledge and insight you can for yourself can also be useful to others. This is true when we observe anything in the world – including ourselves.
So, pick something. It could be your breath, it could be a certain way you’re feeling, it could be a sensation in or on your body, it could be a thought (or a series of thoughts) playing around your head, but pick one thing and then observe it. Observe it as you do “that 90-second thing.” Observe it as you walk on your way or move through your practice. Notice how things shift and change.
Of course, just the fact that you are bringing awareness to the something changes it and changes the way you move in relation to it. What if, however, you bring your awareness to your center? What if you observe how you move in relation to your center and then after a pose or a sequence of poses, you pause and observe the “something” that you picked at the beginning? This becomes a practice about cause and effect, and also a practice about orientation. The only question is: Where’s your center?
When you consider moving from you center, you have several from which you can choose. You can pick your physical center (top to bottom) which is your solar plexus, or your left to right physical center which is your spinal column. Alternately you could pick one of your energetic centers: heart chakra or the center axis defined in various traditions (which essentially corresponds to the area of your spine). Here we are consciously choosing a navigation point, but consider that even when we don’t consciously choose a center for observation or movement, these centers still serve as guiding points, constant lines of reference. When you pick one as your focus it becomes prime – and, just like a cornerstone, it gives you direction.
“When I have got some more observations of it I shall bee [sic] able to tell you how long it will last and where it will pass[. At] present I dare not pretend to that knowledge.”
– quoted from a letter to “to Crompton [for Newton]” dated “December 15th (1680)” by John Flamsteed, the first Astronomer Royal
The cornerstone for the Royal Observatory, Greenwich was laid today (August 10th) in 1675. It is the home of Greenwich Mean Time (0:00:00) and the Prime Meridian Line which is the primary constant dividing East and West. King Charles II established the observatory as well as the position of the Astronomer Royal who the king declared was “to apply himself with the most exact care and diligence to the rectifying of the tables of the motions of the heavens, and the places of the fixed stars, so as to find out the so much desired longitude of places for the perfecting of the art of navigation.”
The observatory has been used throughout its history as a basis for the measurement of timekeeping and mapping. At one time, the Prime Meridian was marked by a metal strip (of various materials), but has been marked with a green laser shining north across London since December 16, 1999. The first Astronomer Royal was John Flamsteed, whose observations and calculations where communicated to scientists like Sir Isaac Newton. Newton actually used comet observations and calculations of Flamsteed and Edmond Halley (who succeeded Flamsteed as Royal Astronomer) in order to prove certain theories in Newton’s Philosophiæ Naturalis Principia Mathematica.
Although we may think of the Prime Meridian as 0⁰ 00’00, it is actually slightly East of center (0⁰ 00’00.417), which requires an adjustment on other lines of navigation in order to provide accurate geographical coordination. Discrepancies aside, even the original line would have been incredibly helpful to Ferdinand Magellan, who set sail today (August 10th) in 1519, with the intention of circumnavigating the globe. Magellan named the Pacific Ocean “peaceful sea” – even though it wasn’t peaceful or a sea – and the Strait of Magellan is named for him, as he used it to sail from the Atlantic Ocean to the Pacific Ocean. After three years, a mutiny, a ship wreck, a ship defection, and a change of course for one ship, one of Magellan’s original ships completed the journey around the world. That ship, the Victoria, contained 18 of the original 270 seamen. Magellan, however, was not included in that number who completed the journey. He was killed in the Philippines (by a poisoned arrow) after involving himself in an indigenous land dispute.
“The profession of astronomy is limited for men, and must necessarily, under the most favourable circumstances, be still more so for women. At the present time there are less than half a dozen women in England who are following astronomy as a profession, and it is improbable that there will ever be employment for more than twenty, either at Greenwich or elsewhere.”
– Isabella Jane Clemes, one of four “Lady Computers” who started working at the Royal Observatory on April 14, 1890*
As you are navigating through your practice, you have the opportunity to explore your body and mind, as well as keep a catalog of all you encounter. In this way, your body and mind are like the Smithsonian Institution, which houses an observatory, 4 research centers, a publishing house, a national library, 16 museums, and the National Zoo. It is the largest museum, education, and research complex and it was established legislation the United States Congress passed today (August 10th) in 1846.
James Smithson was a British scientist who spent his life traveling and gathering information. He never married and indicated that if his nephew and heir died childless then Smithson’s estate should be used to establish an institution for “the increase and diffusion of knowledge.”
At the Smithsonian, you can find thousands of items related to nautical and astronomical observation, time keeping, and Magellan – including a number of navigation devices named for Magellan. Consider, for a moment, what you will find when you explore your own mind-body. Consider, also, how what you find increases your knowledge about yourself (and maybe the world).
“… it is in knowledge that man has found his greatness and his happiness, the high superiority which he holds over the other animals who inherit the earth with him, and, consequently, no ignorance is probably without loss to him, no error without evil, and that it is therefore preferable to urge unwarranted doubts, which can only occasion additional light to become elicited, then to risk by silence letting a question settle to fest, while any unsupported assumptions are involved in it.”
– James Smithson (quoted from his notebook)
Due to a death in my family, I have cancelled classes this week. I plan to continue posting, hopefully in a more timely fashion on Tuesday and Wednesday. My current plan is to “reZoom” classes the week of 16th. Please keep an eye on the “Class Schedules” calendar for updates.
*NOTE: Isabella Jane Clemes, Alice Everett, Edith Mary Rix, and Harriet Maud Furniss all started working as “Lady Computers” at the Royal Observatory on April 14, 1890. They were joined by Annie Scott Dill Maunder (née Russell) and others in 1891. According to a study published in 2010, 667 women attended the International Astronomical Union (IAU)’s General Assembly in Rio de Janeiro in August 2009 – indicating that worldwide there were well over fifty-five times as many women in astronomy than Clemes ever imagined.
Errata 2022: The original post(s) contained a confusing description of the Prime Meridian Line.
### WHERE IN THE WORLD ARE YOU? ###
Who are you on the inside (outside)? August 8, 2020
Posted by ajoyfulpractice in Books, Changing Perspectives, Movies, Philosophy, TV, Wisdom, Writing.Tags: asana, Dr. Irvin Yalom, Epictetus, inspiration, Jose Ortega y Gasset, Jostein Gaarder, Martin Buber, niyamas, Pandit Rajmani Tigunait, Philosophy, Religion, René Descartes, Sophie's World, truth, yamas, yoga philosophy, yoga practice, Yoga Sutra 2.32
2 comments
“Who are you?”
“Where does the world come from?”
– Questions Sophie Amundsen finds in her mailbox in Sophie’s World: A Novel About the History of Philosophy by Jostein Gaarder
In Sophie’s World, 14- (almost 15) year old Sophie Amundsen receives two questions and an odd postcard in her mailbox. Later she receives a packet of papers. The questions are addressed to her, as is the packet. The postcard, however, is odd because it is from Lebanon, has a Norwegian stamp, and is addressed to Hilde Møller Knag – “care of” Sophie. The only problem is that Sophie has never heard of this girl who is her same age. Neither has she heard of Hilde’s father, Albert Knag, who seems to think the girls know each other well enough to exchange mail. Even more curious is that the girls have more in common than an address, an age, and birthdays a month apart – they have similar life circumstances. Sophie is, or course, curious about Hilde and curious about the mail, which turns out to be a survey course in ancient and modern philosophy (through the beginning of the 20th Century). Sophie becomes the philosophy student of Alberto Knox and, in the process, begins a journey not only into philosophy but also into her-self.
“Is there nothing that interests us all? Is there nothing that concerns everyone? Yes, dear Sophie, there are questions that certainly should interest everyone. They are precisely the questions this course is about.
What is the most important thing in life? If we ask someone living on the edge of starvation, the answer is food. If we ask someone dying of cold, the answer is warmth. If we put the same question to someone who feels lonely and isolated, the answer will probably be the company of other people.
But when these basic needs have been satisfied – will there still be something that everyone needs? Philosophers think so. They believe that man cannot live by bread alone. Of course everyone needs food. And everyone needs love and care. But there is something else – apart from that – which everyone needs, and that is to figure out who we are and why we are here. ”
– quoted from the letter in the first packet Sophie Amundsen in Sophie’s World: A Novel About the History of Philosophy by Jostein Gaarder
Born today in 1952 in Oslo, Norway, Jostein Gaarder is the author of novels, short stories and children’s books. He often uses stories within stories to take children and adults on an intellectual journey. In the case of Sophie’s World, which has been translated into at least 53 languages, we take the ultimate journey into the world of philosophy. As I’ve mentioned before, the word philosophy comes to us from Greek, by way of Latin, Old French, and Middle English, from a word that means “love of wisdom.” It is the study of the fundamental nature of knowledge, thought, reality, and existence. It provides a way to think about and understand the world, the universe, and everything. As stated in Wikipedia, it “is the study of general and fundamental questions about existence, knowledge, values, reason, mind, and language.” The most basic question being, “Why?” – Which spirals out of some variation of the questions above.
Throughout the history of the world, people have come at these questions from different directions. René Descartes had his infamous cogito ergo sum – “I think, therefore I am.” José Ortega y Gasset (known for saying “Yo soy yo y mi circunstancia”) took that a step further and said, “I live therefore I think (therefore I am)” – which is a wildly wonderful bit of circular truth. Similar to the Greek stoic philosopher Epictetus (who believed we have no control over our circumstances, only over our reactions to our circumstances), the existential psychiatrist Dr. Irvin Yalom focused on “four givens,” which are experienced by all and with which we define/create our lives. Then there are religious philosophers like Martin Buber, who explored life in the context of the Divine. If you study philosophy, you will find that there is a spectrum of thought and most philosophers are swinging between these different ways of coming at the questions of life. Even more so, though, we are toggling between the two visible sides of life’s cornerstone: what’s happening on the outside and what’s happening on the inside.
This past Wednesday, I mentioned how a cornerstone is the first stone set in the foundation of a structure and how all the other stones are set in reference to the first stone so that the cornerstone determines the overall position of the structure. That being said, when you walk up to a building or structure and look at the cornerstone you will notice that (as it is literally the stone on the corner) you can only see two sides of the stone. When you think of the two sides of the yoga philosophy cornerstone, you find an outside focus (the five yamās) and an inside focus (the five niyamās) – and each of these ten has their own internal and external practice.
Yoga Sūtra 2.32: śaucasantoşatapahsvādhyāyeśvarapraņidhānāni niyamāh
– “Purity (or cleanliness), contentment, austerity (and the practices that lead to austerity), self-study, and a trustful surrender to [the creative source or the constant awareness to the highest reality] are the observances.”
The questions Sophie receives in her mailbox compel her to seek answers. Naturally, she starts within. I say “naturally,” because the book is set in 1990, she’s 14 (almost 15), there’s no internet, and she only has the questions (which are directing her inward). Eventually, she understands the nature of her reality and taps into her own personal will and determination in order to, on a certain level, redefine her reality. In a similar fashion, the five internal observations which make up the second limb of the philosophy of yoga compel the yoga practitioner / philosopher to turn inward, take a look at themselves, and (in the process) take a look at the world and their part in defining it.
I’ve mentioned before that, although the yamās are sometimes referred to as external restraints and very clearly outline a code of conduct towards the world, all practices start with the person practicing. What I mean by this is that we first practice non-violence and non-harming (ahimsā) with ourselves. On the yoga mat, that looks like being mindful of our physical and mental state so that we practice in a safe way even when we are being pushed and challenged to practice on the edge. I think it was Dharma Mittra who said you should breathe and practice as if you are on the edge of a cliff. My apologizes if I have mixed up where I heard this great piece of advice, but I bring it up to point out that the teacher who said it didn’t advise breathing and practicing on the edge of cliff – that would be dangerous! Instead, the advice is to be mindful. Also, to be mindful requires being honest; which means, ahimsās leads directly to satyā (the second yamā).The yoga mat is a place to be mindful about how you interact with yourself so that you are also mindful of how you interact with others.
At first glance, the five niyamās may seem to be things you would only practice on your own. To some, they might even appear to have no bearing on the way we interact with others. Go a little deeper, however, and we find that the internal observations are like Alberto Knox guiding Sophie through the history of philosophy and therefore through different ways we can look at our lives (not to mention different ways to live our lives).
“Basically there are not many philosophical questions to ask. We have already asked some of the most important ones. But history presents us with many different answers to each question. So it is easier to ask philosophical questions than to answer them.”
– quoted from the letter in the first packet Sophie Amundsen in Sophie’s World: A Novel About the History of Philosophy by Jostein Gaarder
When it comes to śauca (cleanliness or “purity”) and the physical practice of yoga, I often focus on how the movement and the poses are a way to detoxify the body. What I miss by doing that, however, is the opportunity to reflect on how the movement and the poses purify the mind. Consider how clean, clutter-free, your mind is after your practice. Now consider how when your mind and body are clean, inside and out, you are less likely to clutter them. Consider also how, over time, the practice of cleanliness related to your mind-body translates into a desire to de-clutter your space and even your life. Even more importantly, consider how, over time, you not only have the desire to clean up – you also have the energy and the will. Therefore, the internal observation becomes a process and a state achieved through the process.
Just as practicing ahimsā (“non-violence”/non-harming) leads directly to the other yamās, practicing śauca leads to the other niyamās. For example, Pandit Rajmani Tigunait, PhD., explains santosha (“contentment”) as “Not desiring more than we have” – which is hard to do when we are surrounded by so much stuff and filled with the physical and mental desire to have more stuff. Once we commit to the practice, we notice that it requires discipline and austerity (which are ways you can translate tapas). Furthermore, as these are all processes as well as states that are cultivated through the processes, there is a constant need to pay attention to how you are feeling, thinking, speaking, and acting – which is not only self-study (svādhyāya), but also another rubric for how to practice.
“The world is not comprehensible, but it is embraceable: through the embracing of one of its beings.”
– quoted from “With a monist” published in Pointing the Way: Collected Essays by Martin Buber
Please join me for a 90-minute virtual yoga practice on Zoom today (Saturday, August 8th) at 12:00 PM, when we will literally and virtually embrace ourselves, in order to embrace the world. You can use the link from the “Class Schedules” calendar if you run into any problems checking into the class. Give yourself extra time to log in if you have not upgraded to Zoom 5.0.
Today’s playlist is available on YouTube and Spotify. (This is the “04262020 Philosophy of Locks” playlist.)
As I have had a death in my family, I will not be teaching on Sunday (8/9) of this week, but I will send a recording of today’s class to anyone on my Zoom class email lists. Please keep an eye on the “Class Schedules” calendar (see link above) as I am not yet sure which classes I will be able to teach next week.
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.
“So now you must choose… Are you a child who has not yet become world-weary? Or are you a philosopher who will vow never to become so? To children, the world and everything in it is new, something that gives rise to astonishment. It is not like that for adults. Most adults accept the world as a matter of course. This is precisely where philosophers are a notable exception. A philosopher never gets quite used to the world. To him or her, the world continues to seem a bit unreasonable – bewildering, even enigmatic. Philosophers and small children thus have an important faculty in common. The only thing we require to be good philosophers is the faculty of wonder…”
– quoted from Sophie’s World: A Novel About the History of Philosophy by Jostein Gaarder
Full disclosure: Jostein Gaarder is an environmental activist who named an environmental development prize after the character of his most famous novel/children’s book. The international award of $100,000 (USD) was issued to people and organizations working with the environment and sustainable development (1998 – 2013). He has also made some polarizing political statements – statements which can easily be seen as anti-Semitic (unless, of course, that is your blind spot).
Edited August 2023.
A Joyful Practice 