EXCERPT (FTWMI): It’s Bach’s Day Too! March 21, 2023
Posted by ajoyfulpractice in Abhyasa, Art, Bhakti, Changing Perspectives, Faith, Fitness, Healing Stories, Hope, Lent, Life, Music, One Hoop, Peace, Philosophy, Religion, Vairagya, Wisdom, Yoga.Tags: Advocacy, Johann Sebastian Bach, memory, Pandit Rajmani Tigunait, Philosophy, samskaras, samskāras, Season for Nonviolence, Season of Non-violence, World Down Syndrome Day, Yoga Sutra 2.11, yoga sutras
add a comment
“Nowruz Mubarak!” Happy New Year to those who are celebrating! Happy Spring to those in the Northern Hemisphere & Happy Fall to those in the Southern Hemisphere. Many blessings to all, and especially to those observing Lent or Great Lent during this “Season for Non-violence” and all other seasons! & Don’t forget to rock your socks on World Down Syndrome Day!
For Those Who Missed It: This is an excerpt from March 21, 2020. There is a link at the end of the excerpt if you want more of the philosophy. Some embedded links below connect to sites outside of this blog. Class details and links have been added (as I was not yet teaching online three years ago today).
“[Music] should have no other end and aim than the glory of God and the re-creation of the soul, where this is not kept in mind, there is no true music, but only an infernal clamour and ranting.”
– Johann Sebastian Bach (b. 1685)
According to the Old Style / Julian calendar, March 21st, is the anniversary of the birth of the composer Johann Sebastian Bach. Born in 1685, Bach’s statement about music also works as a statement for yoga: ‘[Philosophically speaking, yoga] should have no other end and aim than the glory of God and the re-creation of the soul, where this is not kept in mind, there is no true [yoga], but only an infernal clamour and ranting.’ People who think of yoga only as a form of exercise are often surprised that there’s more. One can only imagine their surprise if they walk into one of my classes – especially on March 21st, when the playlist starts with Bach and then becomes a soundtrack for other events that correspond to this date in history.
Imagine their further surprise when all of that is just the background to a deeper practice.
Click here if you are interested in reading the complete 2020 post and going deeper into some of the ways we explore the Yoga Philosophy.
“Samskaras – the drivers of our mental tendencies – manifest in the form of memory. We are able to remember something because the subtle impressions related to the object have been stored in our mind. Because they are hidden beneath thick layers of the forces of time, the mind is not aware of their existence. But like a seed that lies dormant until spring brings moisture and warmth, samskaras awaken when the conditions inside and outside the mind are conducive.”
– quoted from the commentary on Yoga Sūtra 2.11 from The Practice of the Yoga Sūtra: Sadhana Pada by Pandit Rajmani Tigunait, PhD
Please join me today (Tuesday, March 21st) at 12:00 PM or 7:15 PM for a yoga practice on Zoom. You can use the link from the “Class Schedules” calendar if you run into any problems checking into the class. 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.
Tuesday’s playlist is available on YouTube and Spotify. [Look for “03212020 Bach’s Day Too” or “03212021 Bach’s Day Too” ]
NOTE: Some tracks have slightly different timings on the different platforms.
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.)
### I’M ADVOCATING FOR MORE KINDNESS TO YOURSELF & TO OTHERS (& LOTS OF SOCKS)! ###
Understanding, as a tool (a “missing” Sunday post) March 13, 2023
Posted by ajoyfulpractice in 19-Day Fast, Baha'i, Books, Buddhism, Changing Perspectives, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., Faith, Gandhi, Healing Stories, Hope, Lent, Life, Love, Music, One Hoop, Pain, Peace, Pema Chodron, Philosophy, Poetry, Religion, Suffering, Wisdom, Yoga.Tags: Albert Einstein, Brennan Lee Mulligan, e e cummings, Eknath Easwaran, Jane Goodall, Louis Fischer, Mahatma Gandhi Canadian Foundation for World Peace, Mark Kurlansky, Mayumi Oda, niyamas, niyamās, samskaras, samskāras, Season for Nonviolence, Season of Non-violence, shenpa, siddhis, Swami J, Swami Jnaneshvara, Thich Nhat Hanh, Thomas Merton, understanding, vasanas, vāsanās, Yoga Sutra 2.1, Yoga Sutra 3.17
add a comment
Many blessings to all, and especially to those observing Lent, Great Lent, and the Baháʼí 19-Day Fast during this “Season for Non-violence” and all other seasons!
This is the “missing” post for Sunday, March 5th (which includes some quotes used on March 12th). There was no Saturday class last week; however, I secretly snuck in a bit of what would have been Saturday’s theme. 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.
Check out the “Class Schedules” calendar for upcoming classes.)
“People who are good at understanding others are usually good listeners. We can fall into the trap of so earnestly wanting to get our point across, we forget to listen to the person we are speaking to. During your conversations today, instead of letting words go in one ear and out the other, take time to hear what the other person is saying.”
– quoted from the “Action for Teens” section of “ Day 35 ~ March 5th ~ Understanding” of the “Season for Non-violence,” provided by the Mahatma Gandhi Canadian Foundation for World Peace
How well do you understand yourself? For that matter, how well do you understand the people around you – especially those you love? Additionally, how much time and effort do you put into understanding yourself and/or the people around you (every time you inhale, every time you exhale)?
As I mentioned in the “ First Friday Night Special” post, I didn’t immediately click (literally or figuratively) on the fact that each of the themes provided by the Mahatma Gandhi Canadian Foundation for World Peace during the “Season for Non-violence” is connected to a resource page full of quotes, reflections, meditations, and thought-exercises. Although the themes are inspired by the lives and work of Mohandas Gandhi and Martin Luther King Jr. (whose assassination dates mark the beginning and end of the “Season for Non-violence”), the resource pages reference many others and can be used by individuals and/or groups.
I love that the resources help people better understand how each nonviolent principle can be “…a powerful way to heal, transform, and empower our lives and communities.” Last week, after I had to cancel Saturday’s Zoom practice, I also really appreciated how closely the March 4th theme (“love”) aligned with the March 5th theme (“understanding”) – especially when considered in the context of the lives and work of Mahatma Gandhi and Reverend King. They also can be closely aligned when viewed through a Yoga lens, which reinforces the fact that the process of gaining understanding about oneself is already a big part of the Yoga Philosophy.
Gaining understanding about oneself is, quite obviously, the point of svādhyāya (“self-study”), which is the fourth niyamā (internal “observation”) and the second key element of kriyā yoga (“union in action”), as defined by Patanjali in Yoga Sūtra 2.1. The very first siddhi (“power”) described as “unique to being human” is uha, which is “knowledge without doubt, clear understanding, intuitive knowledge.” That ability is inextricably connected to several of the other five – including adhyayana (“study, analyze, and comprehend”). Furthermore, in the third section of the Yoga Sūtras, Patanjali described what sometimes sounds like “Jedi Knight tricks” – including the ability to understand all sounds uttered by any creature (i.e., all languages) (YS 3.17). Finally, towards the end of the sūtras, the culmination of all the powers is described as “the cloud of virtue” or the “cloud of clarity.”
Yet, throughout the sūtras, there are reminders that the achievements and abilities found in the practice can be obstacles to the ultimate objective of the practice. They become obstacles when we forget that they are part of the practice, steps along the way; and not the ultimate goals in-and-of-themselves. Some of the commentary surrounding the siddhis (“powers”) also reinforces the fact that every part of the practice is connected to self awareness. In other words, that part of the practice is training ourselves to be more aware of ourselves and more conscious of what informs our thoughts, words, and deeds.
“The point here is not to manipulate other people through some sort of mind control. The value is in seeing the way that your own mind is affected by the presented thoughts from others, along with the insights about the other mind from which they are being projected. From that we can deal with our own mental conditioning in response to that which might otherwise control our own actions, speech, and thoughts.”
– quoted from the commentary on Yoga Sūtra 3.19 by Swami Jnaneshvara Bharati (as posted on SwamiJ.com)
When we cultivate the skills needed to understand why we act, react, and respond the way we do; we are also opening up to the possibility of understanding why others act, react, and respond the way they do. I say that we open up to that possibility, because (as one of my sister-in-laws has reminded me on more than one occasion) “there are some things that may not be for us to understand.” So, the question becomes: Are you willing to make the effort?
Just making the effort to open up can give us insight into ourselves and can also change the way we interact with people whose behavior seems unfathomable to us. Being open to considering where someone is coming from – and how it is similar or different from where we are coming from – means that we show up with a little more empathy, maybe even a little more compassion. It may mean that we can have a conversation with someone, rather than an argument. It does not mean that we condone bad behavior, nor does it mean that we change someone’s opinion – because, again, it is not about manipulation. However, it can mean that there is just a little less (violent) conflict in a world that is already overflowing with conflict. That moment with less (violent) conflict means there is a little more peace in the world…. It can also mean there is a little more love – especially if we use our power of “understanding” as a tool of nonviolence and a tool of love.
“Love is creative, understanding goodwill for all men. It is the refusal to defeat any individual. When you rise to the level of love, of its great beauty and power, you seek only to defeat evil systems. Individuals who happen to be caught up in that system, you love, but you seek to defeat the system.”
– quoted from “Loving Your Enemies” sermon at Dexter Avenue Baptist Church by Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr. (11/17/1957)
As a simple thought-exercise, take a moment to put yourself in someone else’s shoes. Imagine their heart and their scars; imagine their loves and their losses, their triumphs and their pains. When we do this thought-exercise, we may fall into the trap of thinking, “Well, I would never do what they did.” But, that’s a trap for two reasons. First, we don’t always know how we would react or respond to a situation until we are actually in it. Second, when we initial do this though-exercise we may only do it from our own perspective – which is a great first step in practicing svādhyāya. Then, however, we have to strip away our “whys” and consider that what we would do (or not do) is based on our past experiences – our saṃskāras (mental “impressions”) and our vāsanās (the “dwelling places” of our habits).
Our past experiences have informed our hearts and hard-wired our brains to react and respond in a certain way. That other person, has different experiences, different mental impressions, different habits, different heart information, and different neural pathways (mentally speaking). We can grow up with someone, live in the same home, go to the same schools, share similar likes and dislikes – and still see/understand a shared experience in different ways; which means we have different takeaways. So, to really do the work, we have to be willing to let go of what we know and step into the unknown. We have to acknowledge the things that make us who we are and, therefore, make us see and comprehend (or not) the way we do. Then we have to be willing to not just consider what our view would be if we were sitting on the other side of the divide, but also what our view would be if we were actually the other person sitting on the side of the divide.
Again, this is a basic thought-exercise. It is relatively simple and easy to do when we are considering the viewpoint of a stranger. How willing are you, however, to engage in the same philosophical query when it comes to someone who has hurt you? Maybe the injury was physical; maybe it was a mental and emotional insult. Maybe it was all of the above. The hurt could come from disappointment – and, maybe it was unintentional on their part; just negligent. Or, the hurt could come from a very deliberate and malicious intentional action. Then there’s everything in between. Additionally, it’s possible that the hurt we feel makes it harder to put ourselves in their shoes. Then things get a little more complicated (and interesting) when we consider that the people we love the most (and that we believe are supposed to love us the most) are the ones that can hurt us the most.
Then, we have to go a little deeper into our understanding of love.
“The Greek language comes out with another word for love. It is the word agape, and agape is more than eros. Agape is more than philia. Agape is something of the understanding, creative, redemptive goodwill for all men. It is a love that seeks nothing in return. It is an overflowing love; it’s what theologians would call the love of God working in the lives of men. And when you rise to love on this level, you begin to love men, not because they are likeable, but because God loves them. You look at every man, and you love him because you know God loves him. And he might be the worst person you’ve ever seen.”
– quoted from “Loving Your Enemies” sermon at Dexter Avenue Baptist Church by Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr. (11/17/1957)
Love is energy. Some people even see it as a currency. We can also look at love as tool (or a map) that leads to understanding – just as we can look at understanding as a tool we can use to express (or invest) love. Viewing “love” and “understanding” as synonyms, and/or as tools and the work of those tools, gives us the ability to turn every potential conflict into a moment of nonviolence. One of the first steps in this endeavor is remember that our human tendency to segment and label love-energy can diminish our experience of it, while simultaneously increasing our experience of suffering. This labeling can also cause us to forget (or not realize) that everyone wants and deserves to be loved. Remembering the very human desire to love and be loved – to belong – can help us understand that sometimes people make bad decisions in an effort to make a connection.
For example, depending on our individual experiences, we may not understand why someone joins a gang or a group that seems to continuously spew hatred. If, however, we consider that desire to love and be loved – and the accompanying desires to belong and be accepted – we may find that an individual who is not being accepted by one part of their community will seek that acceptance elsewhere. They may find it in a group that essentially says, “Hey, we will accept you… as long as you believe what we believe (or say you do) and do the things we want you to do.” And while those conditions may seem abhorrent and unacceptable to some, consider this: Unconditional love is very rare in modern society; we just don’t always know the conditions. Gangs, cults, and hate groups have very specific (known) conditions. They’re just not always viewed as conditions. Neither are they initially recognized as the causes and conditions of suffering.
“Everyone you ever knew who told you that they would keep you safe as long as you behaved were already hurting you.”
– Brennan Lee Mulligan (as the Beast) in College Humor’s “Dimension 20: Neverafter” campaign
People’s bad decisions, just like their good decisions, are based on previous experiences. We can look at this on a very personal, individual level and also on a community level. Either consideration gives us an opportunity to step back and gain some insight (i.e., understanding) about our sore spots.
We all have sore spots. When someone pokes them – or when we think someone is going to poke them – it is natural to go on the defensive. We may experience anger, fear, sadness, or all of the above. In certain situations we may feel the need/desire to fight, flee, or freeze/collapse. What we seldom feel when someone is poking our sore spot(s) is tolerance. Even if we start off being patient and searching for understanding, enough pokes will make most of us want to poke back. Then we are off to the races… the “let’s see who can hurt whom the most” races.
“Anger and intolerance are the enemies of correct understanding.”
– attributed to Mahatma Gandhi
Despite what we may think in the moment, there is almost never a winner in situations where everyone is pushing everyone else’s buttons. Everybody loses… and walks away with more sore spots. We also walk away with more reasons to react to situations without thinking through why we are reacting the way we are and the ramifications of our thoughts, words, and deeds. If, however, we take a step back and turn inward, we engage the opportunity to overcome our sore spots and our egos. We take advantage of the opportunity to engage loving-kindness and understanding.
There are several practices that help us turn inward during challenging times. I often recommend the “4 R’s” (Recognize, Refrain, Relax, Resolve) as taught by Ani Pema Chödrön – and often throw in an extra R or two: specifically, to Remember why you are doing what you are doing. Other, similar, practices all provide the opportunity to gain more understanding of oneself and can also help us to better understand the people and the situations around us. These practices can also help us understand how our actions can contribute to peace in the world. This is the understanding Mahatma Gandhi had when he first experienced racism in South Africa – and that understanding led to his life’s work.
“He was not just a separate, physical creature; he saw that he – and, crucially, every other human being – was essentially spiritual, with ‘strength [that] does not come from physical capacity [but] from an indomitable will.’
After this first instinctive ‘holding on to Truth,’ Gandhi turned inward. He had met injustice; it degraded everyone, but everyone accepted it: How could he change himself to help everyone involved see more clearly? Somehow, dimly at first, but with increasing sureness, he had already grasped that a person can be an ‘instrument of peace,’ a catalyst of understanding, by getting himself out of the way.”
– quoted from “The Transformation” section of “Preface to the Vintage Spiritual Classics Edition” as published in The Essential Gandhi: An Anthology of his Writings on his Life, Work, and Ideas, edited by Louis Fischer, preface by Eknath Easwaran
“This, then, is the second crucially important principle that we discover in Gandhi. Contrary to what has been thought in recent centuries in the West, the spiritual or interior life is not an exclusively private affair. (In reality, the deepest and most authentic Western traditions are at one with those of the East on this point.) The spiritual life of one person is simply the life of all manifesting itself in him. While it is very necessary to emphasize the truth that as the person deepens his own thought in silence he enters into a deeper understanding of and communion with the spirit of his people (or of his Church), it is also important to remember that as he becomes engaged in the crucial struggles of his people in seeking justice and truth in himself by seeking justice and truth together with his brother, he tends to liberate the truth in himself by seeking true liberty for all.”
– quoted from “II. Introduction: Gandhi and the One-Eyed Giant” by Thomas Merton as published in Gandhi on Non-Violence: Selected Texts from Mohandas K. Gandhi’s Non-Violence in Peace and War, Edited by Thomas Merton, Preface by Mark Kurlansky
We are all connected in multiple ways. To paraphrase e e cummings, we carry each other inside of ourselves. Ironically, sometimes we need to take a step back in order to truly recognize and honor our connections. The example I often use in the practice is to recognize that even if we don’t take a physical bind (on the outside) our arms and hands are still connected. They are connected through our hearts and through our minds. Similarly, if we have a pain on one side of our body, we may be so focused on the presenting pain that we fail to notice how the hurting part is connected to the other parts. When we understand the connections, however, we may be able to reduce (or even eliminate) future harm and suffering.
“When you understand, you cannot help but love. You cannot get angry. To develop understanding, you have to practice looking at all living beings with the eyes of compassion. When you understand, you love. And when you love, you naturally act in a way that can relieve the suffering of people.”
– quoted from “2. The Three Gems” in Being Peace by Thich Nhat Hanh, forward by Jane Goodall, illustrated by Mayumi Oda
The physical example above can also be applied to interpersonal situations. When we understand how we work (physically, mentally, emotionally, spiritually, and energetically) we can be more present and more intentional/mindful. This is true on an individual level and also on a community level. Ultimately, it also brings us back to one of the original questions: How much time and effort do you put into understanding yourself and/or the people around you?
Would you be willing to put in the same amount of time that professional trapeze artists put into their art?
There is beauty, athleticism, and risk involved every time people fly through the air. There also must be some level of understanding about how everyone and everything works. Finally, there must be trust/faith. There must be trust/faith between the artists and also between the artists and all of the technicians and support crew. Then, too, there is trust between everyone and the audience – because we are all connected. We may not always be consciously aware of the connections and we may not always (consciously) understand how those connections work. However, the beauty is magnified when we respect and honor those connections. Our esteem rises when we understand all that it takes to put on the show.
Life is very much the same.
“mortals)
climbi
ng i
nto eachness begi
n
dizzily
swingthings
of speeds of
trapeze gush somersaults
open ing
hes shes”
– quoted from the poem “[‘mortals…’]” by e e cummings
Sunday’s playlist is available on YouTube and Spotify. [Look for “10142020 ‘I carry you in my heart’”]
“i carry your heart with me(i carry it in
my heart)i am never without it(anywhere
i go you go,my dear;and whatever is done
by only me is your doing,my darling)”
– quoted from the poem “[i carry your heart with me(i carry it in]” by e e cummings
Corrections: During the practice, I accidently attributed the Eknath Easwaran quote to Thomas Merton. I also used a quote often attributed to Albert Einstein (“Peace cannot be kept by force. It can only be achieved by understanding.”); however, I could not confirm an original source.
### UNDERSTAND LOVE ###
FTWMI: Uncovering Layers to Reveal Truth (the “missing” Monday post) February 28, 2023
Posted by ajoyfulpractice in "Impossible" People, Books, Changing Perspectives, Depression, Faith, Healing Stories, Health, Hope, Life, Mysticism, One Hoop, Pain, Peace, Philosophy, Religion, Suffering, Wisdom, Women, Writing, Yoga.Tags: Abraham Lincoln, Anna O, Bertha Pappenheim, Cooper Union, Dr. Irvin Yalom, Elizabeth KOULTON, Elizabeth Loentz, Glückel of Hamelnl, Jesse William Weik, Josef Breuer, Malchut, Noah Brooks, psychoanalysis, psychology, samskāras, Samyama, Sigmund Freud, slavery, Stephen Douglas, Virginia Satir, William H. Herndon, Yoga Sutras 3.4-3.6
add a comment
Many blessings to all, and especially to those observing Lent or preparing to observe Great Lent during this “Season for Non-violence” and all other seasons!
For Those Who Missed It: This “missing” post for Monday, February 27th is a revised version of a 2021 post. You can request a recording of either 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. Donations are tax deductible; class purchases are not necessarily deductible.)
Check the “Class Schedules” calendar for upcoming practices.
“This can already be seen in the different reception given a new citizen of the world. If the father or someone else asked what ‘it’ was after a successful birth, the answer might be either the satisfied report of a boy, or—with pronounced sympathy for the disappointment— ‘Nothing, a girl,’ or ‘Only a girl.’”
– Bertha Pappenheim as quoted in The Jewish Woman: New Perspectives, edited by Elizabeth Koultun
Imagine that, at a very early age, you are exposed to an idea. It doesn’t have to be a big idea, stated and codified in a systematic way. It could just be a simple statement. It could be an idea (or a statement) about age, gender, race, ethnicity, religious and/or political beliefs – it could even be an idea about height or weight or hair texture (or length) or skin and/or eye hue. Or maybe it’s a statement about ability. Either way, the moment that you are exposed to the idea, some part of you questions whether it is true and even considers the validity of the idea/statement based on the source. You may not be conscious of this questioning, but it happens – sometimes quickly, in a blink – and then, as you move forward, other things (and people) either confirm the veracity of the idea or invalidate the idea.
Now, imagine that you grow up with this idea and this idea, whether you feel it is directed at you or at people around you, becomes – on a certain level – the lens through which you view yourself and the world. You may not be conscious of this lens. In fact, in most cases, this bias (whether we view it as positive or negative) is unconscious… subterranean. In the Yoga Philosophy, saṃskāra is a Sanskrit word for mental “impressions,” that can also be defined as “idea, notion, conception.” Saṃskāra are the foundation or roots of our thoughts, words, and deeds. Neurologically speaking, we can think of them as hard-wired pathways that are sometimes such an integral part of us they make habitual responses to certain situations appear instinctual. They are the beginning of the best of us… and also the worst of us.
“The conscious mind may be compared to a fountain playing in the sun and falling back into the great subterranean pool of subconscious from which it rises.”
– Sigmund Freud, as quoted in his New York Times obituary (09/24/1939)
We all know that if we want to get to the root of a problem, we have to start at the surface – or start with what we can see – and dig deep. This is obvious, but it’s not easy. It’s not easy because, even knowing this very basic principle about where things begin, we can easily get distracted by fruit flies, rotting trunks, fungi, and beings throwing things at us from the tree limbs because we have worn out our welcome. We can just as easily get caught up in the beauty of the blossoms or the promise of a swing. We can also get defeated by all the work/effort that it takes to get to the bottom of things.
However, being distracted (or defeated) doesn’t change the fact that to get to the bottom of something, we have to literally get to the bottom of something. It also doesn’t change the fact that if we want to grow or build something – something that has a chance of withstanding the changing of the times – we have to build from the ground up. Nor does it change the fact that when we run into a problem – as we build a life, a business, and/or a home – we may not have to tear everything down and start over from scratch; however, we do have to trace back from the top to the bottom.
This very basic principle is the reason why existential therapists, like Virginia Satir and Irvin Yalom, said that the “presenting issue,” “surface problem,” and/or life’s “givens” were not the problem. Instead, they said that people’s problems are how they deal or cope with various elements in their lives. This is commonly understood today; but, in the 1950’s and 1960’s these were still groundbreaking theories. While modern psychotherapists (and even corporate change management specialists) continue to build on the efforts of those aforementioned therapists from the mid-1900’s, the roots of their work can be found in the work of Drs. Sigmund Freud and Josef Breuer and in the life and work of Bertha Pappenheim.
She would ultimately become a feminist, education organizer, activist, writer, and translator – whose work and life often appeared in newspapers. The works she translated into German include: Mary Wollstonecraft’s The Vindication of the Rights of Women; the Western Yiddish memoirs of her own ancestor, Glückel of Hamelnl; the “Women’s Talmud;” and other Old Yiddish texts (written for and/or by women). She also founded organizations like Jüdischer Frauenbund (JFB, the Jewish Women’s Association); served as the first president of JFB and as a board member of Bund Deutscher Frauenvereine (BDF, Federation of German Women’s Associations), when JFB joined the national organization; and also served as director of an orphanage for Jewish girls that was run by Israelitischer Frauenverein (Israelite Women’s Association). She even appeared onstage as her own ancestor in a play (that she produced) based on her version of Glückel’s memoirs. But before she made a name for herself through her efforts to improve the conditions of the world around her – especially the living and working conditions of the women and girls around her, Bertha Pappenheim was known to the psychoanalysis world as “Anna O” or “Only A Girl,” because of the work she did to improve her own internal conditions.
“Other details of Glückel’s life story doubtless also held great appeal for Pappenheim. As a survivor of mental illness and the inventor of the ‘talking cure,’ Pappenheim may also have been intrigued by Glückel’s disclosure that she started her memoirs as a sort of ‘writing cure’ to ward off ‘melancholy thoughts’ in the sleepless nights after her husband’s death.”
– quoted from Let Me Continue to Speak the Truth: Bertha Pappenheim as Author and Activist by Elizabeth Loentz
Born in Vienna on February 27, 1859, Bertha Pappenheim was the third daughter born into a wealthy and prestigious Jewish family, with Orthodox roots. She was born knowing that her family and her community prized sons over daughters, boys over girls. She was raised as was appropriate for her station in life – learning needlepoint and multiple languages and attending a Roman Catholic girls’ school while observing Jewish holidays. At the same time, she had to deal with the understandable emotions that came from knowing that one of her older sisters died in adolescence (before Pappenheim was born) and then experiencing the death of the second sister in adolescence (when Pappenheim was eight). Then there was the normal stress that occurred when her family moved into a primarily impoverished neighborhood (when she was eleven); the expected jealousy she felt when her younger brother went to high school (even though she had to leave school at sixteen, despite her curious mind – because of the whole being a girl thing); and then that whole being “just a girl” thing that loomed like a specter over many of her experiences.
Notice, I use words like “understandable,” “normal,” and “expected” to describe Pappenheim’s experiences and emotions. In her lived reality, however, her emotions were not recognized, acknowledged, nor honored as valid. In fact, as was common for the time and her station in life, her experiences were largely ignored… until there was a problem. Her “problems” initially presented themselves as physical and mental ailments: “a nervous cough, partial paralysis, severe neuralgia, anorexia, impaired sight and hearing, hydrophobia, frightening hallucinations, an alternation between two distinct states of consciousness, violent outbursts, and the inability to speak German, her native tongue.”
The presenting ailments started when her father became ill, when she was twenty-one, and worsened after her father died. She was diagnosed with “hysteria,” because… well, that was the most common diagnosis given to women at the time regardless of symptoms. As I mentioned on the anniversary of Freud’s birth, Breuer didn’t try to cure or “correct” the patient he would call Anna O. Instead, he started her under a new therapy he was trying out: he hypnotized her and encouraged her to talk in order to reveal the underlying causes of her symptoms. Pappenheim called it her “talking cure” or “chimney sweeping” and reported that it alleviated her symptoms. In theory (Breuer’s theory), it helped her get to the root of her problems.
“Psychoanalysis in the hands of the physician is what confession is in the hands of the Catholic priest. It depends on its user and its use, whether it becomes a beneficial tool or a two-edged sword.”
– Bertha Pappenheim (also known as “Anna O”)
Breuer’s “theory” became Freud’s “therapy.” But, take a moment to notice that these ideas about how the conscious, subconscious, and unconscious mind interact and manifest in our mind-body can actually be found in ancient texts like Patanjali’s Yoga Sutras, the Bhagavad Gita, and even the Ashtavakra Gita – texts on systems and processing “therapies” that predate the births of everyone mentioned above! Patanjali even described obstacles and ailments which match up with Bertha Pappenheim’s symptoms. (Also interesting to note is the fact that modern medical scientists and historians, after reviewing her case, have diagnosed Pappenheim with everything from “complex partial seizures exacerbated by drug dependence” to tuberculosis meningitis to temporal lobe epilepsy.) Even more important than Pappenheim’s diagnosis is what she was able to achieve once she was able to get to (and address) the root of her problems – and the methods by which she got to the roots.
In describing his therapy methods in The Interpretation of Dreams, Freud wrote, “The interpretation of dreams is the royal road to knowledge of the unconscious activities of the mind.” Again, there is a parallel, as the entire 8-Limbed Philosophy of Yoga is sometimes called “Rāja Yoga” (literally “king union” or “chief union”), which is understood as “royal union.” Given her background, Bertha Pappenheim might have equated a royal path with the sefirot (or divine attribute) of Malchut, which is Queenship or Kingship on the Tree of Life and denotes mastery. While Rāja Yoga as a whole is full of tools for introspection, the ultimate tools are the last three limbs (dhāranā, dhyāna, samādhi) which combine to form the most powerful tool: Samyama, which is like a laser beam or a drill that lets you see beneath the surface.
Yoga Sūtra 3.4: trayam-ekatra samyama
– “Samyama is [the practice or integration of] the three together.”
Yoga Sūtra 3.5: taj-jayāt prajñālokah
– Through the mastery or achievement of Samyama comes higher consciousness or the light of knowledge.
Yoga Sūtra 3.6: tasya bhūmişu viniyogah
– It is to be applied or practiced in stages.
Yoga Sūtras 3.4 – 3.6 are not only instruction or guidance; they are also a warning from Patanjali. In short, no matter how excited or anxious we may get about the powers and abilities that can be achieved through the practice, it is best not to rush the practice or skip steps. Perhaps Swami Prabhavananda and Christopher Isherwood summarized it best in their commentary when they wrote, “It is no use attempting meditation before we have mastered concentration. It is no use trying to concentrate upon subtle objects until we are able to concentrate on gross ones. Any attempt to take a short cut to knowledge of this kind is exceedingly dangerous.”
The dangers are relatively obvious when we are dealing with certain poses. For instance, we would be ill-advised to practice a Sideways Floor Bow (Pārśva Dhanurāsana) if we have never practiced a regular Floor Bow (Dhanurāsana) – How would we even get into the pose?? And, it would not be very beneficial to attempt Floor Bow if a backbend like Locust (śalabhāsana) is not accessible. While we can easily see that in the physical examples, it can be a little harder to see when it comes to concepts and ideas. For instance, when we see something wrong in the world – and we know the roots of the problem – we may be in such a rush for other people to see what we see that we skip the steps that allow them to get it. Just as there is great power in the process, there is great power in being able to walk someone through the logical process.
“It only remains to say that his speech was devoid of all rhetorical imagery, with a marked suppression of the pyrotechnics of stump oratory. It was constructed with a view to the accuracy of statement, simplicity of language, and unity of thought. In some respects like a lawyer’s brief, it was logical, temperate in tone, powerful – irresistibly driving conviction home to men’s reasons and their souls.”
– quoted from Herndon’s Lincoln: The True Story of a Great Life (Volume 3) by William H. Herndon and Jesse William Weik
On February 27, 1860, the future President Abraham Lincoln gave a speech at Cooper Union for the Advancement of Science and Art. The address essentially walked people towards the roots of the problem of slavery and the opposition to ending slavery in the United States. He started with the Declaration of Independence and the “intention” of the Founding Fathers. Then, he elucidated on the differences between Republican and Democratic views at that time. It was one of his longest speeches and one that required a great deal of research. Many historians agree that the Cooper Union address solidified Lincoln’s selection as the Republican nominee for President and, possibly, clinched his win. It was even printed in the newspapers and distributed as part of his campaign. (William Herndon, Lincoln’s law partner at the time, stated that while it may not have actually taken campaign workers three weeks to fact check the speech – since most of the facts came from single set of sources – the fact checking was no small endeavor.)
Lincoln’s Cooper Union address has been described as “stunningly effective” and one of the “most convincing political arguments ever made in [New York] City.” It did not, however, convince everyone; perhaps, in part, because while he went towards the roots, he didn’t really get to the bottom of the problem. The bottom of the problem being that, while the Founding Fathers recognized the problems and inhumanity of slavery, they compromised on the issue in order to gain the political leverage they needed to unanimously declare independence from Great Britain.
Lincoln was also willing to compromise – and in a similar fashion; however, he was very adamant in his belief that the original compromise was enacted with an understanding that slavery would end on its own (as a natural evolution of the country’s development) and/or that the there were means available for the Federal Government to step in and make the changes needed for the country to adhere to its founding principles.
“If any man at this day sincerely believes that a proper division of local from federal authority, or any part of the Constitution, forbids the Federal Government to control as to slavery in the federal territories, he is right to say so, and to enforce his position by all truthful evidence and fair argument which he can. But he has no right to mislead others, who have less access to history, and less leisure to study it, into the false belief that ‘our fathers who framed the Government under which we live’ were of the same opinion – thus substituting falsehood and deception for truthful evidence and fair argument. If any man at this day sincerely believes ‘our fathers who framed the Government under which we live,’ used and applied principles, in other cases, which ought to have led them to understand that a proper division of local from federal authority or some part of the Constitution, forbids the Federal Government to control as to slavery in the federal territories, he is right to say so. But he should, at the same time, brave the responsibility of declaring that, in his opinion, he understands their principles better than they did themselves; and especially should he not shirk that responsibility by asserting that they ‘understood the question just as well, and even better, than we do now.’”
– quoted from Abraham Lincoln’s address at Cooper Union for the Advancement of Science and Art, February 27. 1860 (during which he repeatedly quotes a statement made by Senator Stephen Douglas)
There is no music for the Common Ground Meditation Center practice.
The playlist used in 2021 is available on YouTube and Spotify. [Look for “05062020 What Dreams May Come”]
“This is the testimony of one who was present on that historic occasion: ‘When Lincoln rose to speak, I was greatly disappointed. He was tall, tall, – oh, how tall, and so angular and awkward that I had, for an instant, a feeling of pity for so ungainly a man. His clothes were black and ill-fitting, badly wrinkled – as if they had been jammed carelessly into a trunk. His bushy head, with the stiff black hair thrown back, was balanced on a long and lean head-stalk, and when he raised his hands in an opening gesture, I noticed that they were very large. He began in a low tone of voice – as if he were used to speaking out-doors, and was afraid of speaking too loud…. But pretty soon he began to get into his subject; he straightened up, made regular and graceful gestures; his face lighted up as with an inward fire; the whole man was transfigured. I forgot his clothes, his personal appearance, and his individual peculiarities. Presently, forgetting myself, I was on my feet like the rest, yelling…. When he reached the climax, the thunders of applause were terrific. It was a great speech. When I came out of the hall, my face was glowing with excitement and my frame all a-quiver, a friend with his eyes aglow, asked me what I thought of Abe Lincoln, the rail-splitter. I said: “He’s the greatest man since St. Paul.” And I think so yet.’”
– quoted from Abraham Lincoln and the Downfall American Slavery by Noah Brooks (published 1888)
### “The mind is like an iceberg, it floats with one-seventh of its bulk above water.” ~ SF, maybe ###
FTWMI: A Simple, Radical, “Bad to the Bone” Man January 11, 2023
Posted by ajoyfulpractice in Abhyasa, Bhakti, Books, Changing Perspectives, Dharma, Faith, Healing Stories, Hope, Japa-Ajapa, Karma Yoga, Life, Music, Mysticism, One Hoop, Rabbi Abraham Joshua Heschel, Religion, Suffering, Wisdom, Yoga.Tags: activism, Cardinal August Bea, Dr. Susannah Heschel, habits, kabbalah, Martin Luther King Jr, mitzvot, Rabbi Abraham Joshua Heschel, samskāras, Selma to Montgomery, vasanas, Vatican II
add a comment
For Those Who Missed It: The following was originally posted today in 2022. In addition to some slight edits, this post includes updated class details and a remixed playlist.
“Our goal should be to live life in radical amazement. …get up in the morning and look at the world in a way that takes nothing for granted. Everything is phenomenal; everything is incredible; never treat life casually. To be spiritual is to be amazed.”
– Rabbi Abraham Joshua Heschel
In American English, “bad” has two meanings, one of which is “even better than good.” The saying “bad to the bone” fits with that positive description and is often associated with someone who is “cool,” rebellious, and radical in a way that bucks the system… in a way, even, that can bring much needed change. There are some people who play with the idea of being “bad to the bones,” but the truth is that that kind of goodness has nothing to do with the clothes one wears so much as it has to do with what’s underneath, what’s at the core and the roots of a person. In other words, what matters is who they are all the way down to their bones.
One of my favorite inspirational reminders is based on the idea that, in Judaism, there are 248 mitzvot aseh (“positive commandments”), which are commands to perform certain activities, and 365 mitzvot lo taaseh (“negative commandments”), which are commands to abstain from certain activities; meaning, we should avoid avoid the negative things every day of the year and do the good things with “every bone in our body.”* To me, someone who manages to do that in a very public way is “bad to the bone.”
The following is an abridged version of a post from January of 2021. Click here for the original post.
“Our concern is not how to worship in the catacombs but how to remain human in the skyscrapers.”
– quoted from “Part V: The Meaning of this Hour – 40. Religion in Modern Society” in Between God and Man by Rabbi Abraham Joshua Heschel
It is one thing to practice our beliefs and hold tight (but not too tightly) to the tenets of our faith, whatever that means to you, when life is good and everything is easy. But life, as we have recently been reminded, can be hard, twisted, upside down, and backwards; in a word, challenging. So, sometimes the best way to notice how we show up in the world, in general, is to specifically notice how we show up in stressful / challenging situations. For instance, what is your habit when things are so challenging and all consuming, people – including yourself – might expect you to compromise?
I don’t know much about the person who (first) asked Rabbi Abraham Joshua Heschel if he found time to pray when he participated in the march from Selma to Montgomery, but I know the person – a journalist – was motivated by at least two pieces of knowledge: (1) they knew Rabbi Heschel was a man of faith and (2) they probably knew that Judaism prescribes daily prayers throughout the day. There is another possible piece of motivating knowledge, projection – it’s possible, probable even, that the person asking the question couldn’t imagine how prayer was possible during such a tumultuous time and in a situation where the faithful rabbi was surrounded by Christians. But, here’s the thing about Rabbi Heschel, he was use to praying with his whole body and he was use to being surrounded by Christians.
“I prayed with my feet.”
– Rabbi Abraham Joshua Heschel in 1965, when asked if he found time to pray when marching from Selma to Montgomery
Born today in 1907, Rabbi Abraham Joshua Heschel was a professor of the Kabbalah (Jewish mysticism), an activist, and is (to this day) considered one of the most significant and influential theologians of the 20th century. The youngest of six, his father died when he was nine, but his family was firmly established in the community, as he was the descendant of distinguished Chasidic rabbis on both sides of his family. He grew up in a household and in a religious tradition where prayer and a declaration of faith were prescribed multiple times a day – “when you sit in your house and when you walk on the road, when you lie down and when you rise” – and where there was an obligation to leave the world better than it was found. He earned his rabbinical doctorate in Berlin during the rise of the Nazi Party and could chronicle a parallel in that rise and a decline in the esteem he had previously received based on the merit of his scholarship. At times he felt abandoned by his Christian teachers, mentors, and peers. But, there was something in him – maybe everything in him – that could not step away from the spiritual path he was on, a path first paved by the prophets and rabbis whose lives he chronicled.
In addition to writing several biographies about his mystical elders, Rabbi Heschel was a student and a professor of Jewish mysticism (Kabbalism), in which the Tree of Life can be seen as a way to understand the world, a way to live in the world, and a spiritual road map for those desiring a deeper connection. He was in the habit of viewing, exploring, and gaining understanding of the world and his engagement in the world through the lens of this tradition that recognizes seven areas of the body as ways to express seven of the ten energies/attributes of the Divine (as found on the Tree of Life):
- Chesed (“loving-kindness”), right arm;
- Gevurah (“strength”), left arm;
- Tiferet (“beauty,” “balance,” or “compassion”), the heart;
- Netzach (“endurance”), right hip and leg;
- Hod (“humility”), left hip and leg;
- Yesod (“Foundation” or “Bonding”), solar plexus;
- Malchut (“mastery” or “nobility”), hands, feet, and mouth.
Being in the habit of seeing the body as something intended to express elements of the Divine, meant that everything Rabbi Heschel did could be seen as a religious / spiritual experience. Everything was symbolic – and, therefore, the simplest things held great power.
Of course, there was nothing simple about showing up at a Civil Rights demonstration at the height (and site) of defining violence. Yet, for Rabbi Heschel there was no question that he would show up. He knew that his presence, like the presence of so many others who were not Black (and, in his case, not Christian), would be a unifying presence. He knew that showing up sent a message to the world indicating that the issue of civil rights was not only “an American problem,” as President Lyndon B. Johnson would later say, but also an international problem.
Additionally, as a man of faith and as a religious leader, Rabbi Heschel simply felt that showing up was a kind of spiritual obligation. In fact, he sent a telegram (dated June 16, 1963) to President John F. Kennedy stating that to continue humiliating (and subjugating) African Americans meant that they (religious leaders) “forfeit the right to worship God.” Let it sink in for a moment that a Jewish mystic demanded leadership in the form of “moral grandeur and spiritual audacity” from a Catholic president on behalf of a group of people led by Black Baptist minister. There’s a lot there that could be divisive – unless, regardless of your religion or denomination, you are bound by the Spirit.
“For my father, though, the march was not simply a political demonstration, but a religious occasion. He saw it as a revival of prophetic Judaism’s political activism and also of the traditions of Hasidism, a Jewish pietistic revival movement that arose in the late eighteenth century, according to which walking could be a spiritual experience.
He said it reminded him of the message of the prophets, whose primary concern was social injustice, and of his Hasidic forebears, for whom compassion for the suffering of other people defined a religious person.”
– quoted from an article about the 40th Anniversary of the Selma-Montgomery marches, by Dr. Susannah Heschel
In addition to marching arm-in-arm with Black Christians like Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. and Representative John Lewis in 1965, Rabbi Abraham Joshua Heschel also participated in the Second Ecumenical Council of the Vatican (more commonly known as the Second Vatican Council or Vatican II) in 1962. Prior to Vatican II, the Roman Catholic Church was “in the habit” of teaching the history of Jesus in a way that demonized Jewish people – and missed the part where a lot of different groups of people were part of the story. Rabbi Heschel worked closely with Cardinal Augustin Bea, the Jesuit head of the Secretariat for the Christian Unity, to write the Nostra aetate, which dynamical changed the way the Church teaches and views Jewish people; fostered mutual knowledge and respect among congregants of the two faiths; and ensured that the Church officially (and categorically) condemned anti-Semitism. Here too, the good rabbi’s work outside of the synagogue was a reflection of his work inside of the synagogue, and vice versa. Here too, he honored the traditions (and the ethics) of his spiritual fathers.
Here too, Rabbi Heschel’s spiritual habits showed everyone who was in the habit of being.
“We do not step out of the world when we pray; we merely see the world in a different setting. The self is not the hub but the spoke of the revolving wheel. It is precisely the function of prayer to shift the center of living from self-consciousness to self-surrender….
Prayer takes the mind out of the narrowness of self-interest and enables us to see the world in the mirror of the holy.”
– quoted from Man’s Quest for God: Studies in Prayer and Symbolism by Rabbi Abraham Joshua Heschel
Please join me today (Wednesday, January 11th) 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. 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.
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 are tax deductible; class purchases are not necessarily deductible.)
*NOTE: The aforementioned aphorism is based on an ancient Hebrew idea that there are 248 bones or significant organs in the body.
### Amen, Selāh ###
FTWMI: How Do You Respond? September 14, 2022
Posted by ajoyfulpractice in Books, Changing Perspectives, Japa-Ajapa, Life, Philosophy, Science, Wisdom, Writing, Yoga.Tags: Dr. Ivan Pavlov, Pandit Rajmani Tigunait, Pavlov's dog, Pavlovian, samskāras, Swami Jnaneshvara, yoga philosophy, Yoga Sutra 1.12
add a comment
For Those Who Missed It: The following was originally posted in 2020. This slight revision includes updated class details and music links, plus a link to my “9 Days” series.
“According to Yoga philosophy, the causes of our thought patterns have a much deeper source than we normally realize. Our inner world is propelled by our habits, which in turn govern and determine the nature of our emotions, thoughts, speech, and actions. Our habits form our personality. They have a powerful influence on our unconscious behavior, as well as on our conscious decisions.”
– commentary on Yoga Sūtra 1.12 from The Secret of the Yoga Sutra: Samadhi Pada by Pandit Rajmani Tigunait, PhD
Habits: The things we do repeatedly, routinely, sometimes without thought or consideration. There are habits we label as “good” and others we label as “bad” – and then there are the ones that just are. There are habits we cultivate and others we may attempt to break. Even as people talk about all the different external factors to cultivating or breaking a habit – like how many days it takes (20, 30, or 40) and what life hacks enable them (like leaving your running shoes by the door, pre-packing your gym bag, or setting your phone to shut down media after a certain time) – habits, like all muscle memory, are ultimately mental exercises.
Even though we may not think very much about certain habits, they are happening because of what’s going on inside of our brains. We do something for the first time and a neural pathway is formed. We repeat the behavior enough times and the pathway is hardwired. Suddenly we feel compelled to do something or we think “it’s just what I/we do.” Even sometimes when the behavior is detrimental, harmful, to ourselves and others; we may not give it a second thought. In the Yoga Philosophy, such deeply ingrained or embedded habits (regardless of if we consider them “good” or “bad”) are considered vāsanās (“dwelling places”), which are based on samskaras (“mental impressions”). While such habits can feel instinctual, they are in fact conditioned.
“It is not accidental that all phenomena of human life are dominated by the search for daily bread – the oldest link connecting all living things, man included, with the surrounding nature.”
– quoted from the Dec. 12, 1904 Nobel Lecture “Physiology of Digestion” by Dr. Ivan Pavlov, winner of the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine
For most of his life, Dr. Ivan Petrovich Pavlov celebrated his birthday today, September 14th. It was his habit. Born in Ryazan in 1849, he would be 68 when the Russian Empire switched from the Julian to the Gregorian calendar (at which point his date of birth would be recognized as September 26th). Imagine if you had lived 68 years, doing things with a certain reference point in mind and then, suddenly, that reference point changed. Now, I can’t say for sure that it phased the Nobel laureate one way or the other – I don’t even know how (or if) he celebrated his birthday. What I do know is that Dr. Pavlov knew a thing or two about habits.
The oldest of 11, and known as a curious and active child, Ivan Pavlov started school late because of an accident. He went to theological seminary for a bit, but his curiosity ultimately led him to the university at St. Petersburg and the field of medical research. He won several awards throughout his career, including the 1904 Nobel Prize for Physiology and Medicine “in recognition of his work on the physiology of digestion, through which knowledge on vital aspects of the subject has been transformed and enlarged.” The Nobel Committee’s description of why Dr. Pavlov won was in part a nod to the fact that he had been nominated four years in a row (starting in 1901). His ultimate win, however, was the direct result of experiments exploring the gastric function of dogs (and children).
Dr. Pavlov first noted that dogs started salivating before their food was actually delivered. He initially called the physiological anticipation, “psychic secretion,” but eventually his reflex system work would be viewed within the paradigm of classical conditioning, respondent conditioning, or Pavlovian conditioning. He was one of the first scientists to associate behavioral responses to environmental stimuli, and his research has been extended into various aspects of psychology, behavior modification therapy, and learning theory. Literally right up until his death, he hosted “Wednesday meetings,” where he discussed everything from physiology and psychology to his views on the treatment of animals by research scientists. While other scientists routinely cited him and his work, Dr. Pavlov has also been immortalized by fiction writers like Aldus Huxley, Anthony Burgess, and Thomas Pynchon. In fact, his work was so instrumental in our understanding of the mind-body connection that people who have never studied medical physiology are aware of “the Pavlovian response.
“When the dog is repeatedly teased with the sight of objects inducing salivary secretion from a distance, the reaction of the salivary glands grows weaker and weaker and finally drops to zero. The shorter the intervals between repeated stimulations the quicker the reaction reaches zero, and vice versa. These rules apply fully only when the conditions of the experiment are kept unchanged…. These relations also explain the real meaning of the above-mentioned identity of experimental conditions; every detail of the surrounding objects appears to be a new stimulus. If a certain stimulus has lost its influence, it can recover the latter only after a long resting that has to last several hours.
The lost action, however, can also be restored with certainty at any time by special measures.”
– quoted from the Dec. 12, 1904 Nobel Lecture “Physiology of Digestion” by Dr. Ivan Pavlov, winner of the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine
While Ivan Pavlov and the Pavlovian response are often associated with the ringing of a bell, his written records indicate a plethora of external stimuli, including visual stimuli. Ultimately, he explains that what is most important is that the conditions are controlled and that the test subjects had control of their faculties. In fact, he used the global platform of his Nobel lecture to state, categorically, “Our success was mainly due to the fact that we stimulated the nerves of animals that easily stood on their own feet and were not subjected to any painful stimulus either during or immediately before stimulation of their nerves.” On another occasion, Dr. Pavlov encouraged scientists to be curious and not “a mere recorder of facts.” His lessons and research run parallel to the elements of practice which Patanjali described thousands of years before as being a method of controlling the activities of the mind, including the mental impressions known as samskaras and those deeply embedded habits known as vāsanās.
Take a moment to consider what habits you’ve have been developing that you we may or may not have intended to cultivate
“abhyāsa vairāgyābhyāṁ tat nirodhaḥ” (YS 1.12)
abhyāsa Practice over a long period/without interruption
vairāgyābhyāṁ Non-attachment, without attraction or aversion
tat Those (referring to the “fluctuations of the mind” as described in previous sutras)
nirodhaḥ Ceases, controls, quiets, stills, regulates, masters
Please join me today (Wednesday, September 14th) at 4:30 PM or 7:15 PM for a yoga practice on Zoom, where we will consider the process of forming (and changing) habits. 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. 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 “09042021 Experiencing the Mind”]
Check out my “9 Days” series for an ongoing exploration of intentionally cultivating habits.
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 are tax deductible; class purchases and donations directly to me are not necessarily deductible.)
### “NEVER GIVE UP / ALWAYS LET GO” (Swami J) ###
Still Dreaming the Heart’s Wildest Dream August 28, 2022
Posted by ajoyfulpractice in Changing Perspectives, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., Healing Stories, Hope, Life, Maya Angelou, Music, One Hoop, Pain, Philosophy, Poetry, Suffering, Vairagya, Wisdom, Yoga.Tags: Brandan Odums, Caroline Myss, Darius Simpson, Emily Dickinson, Maya Angelou, Robert Pirsig, samskaras, samskāras, vasanas
add a comment
“Bringing the gifts that my ancestors gave,
I am the dream and the hope of the slave.
I rise
I rise
I rise.”
– quoted from the poem “Still I Rise” by Maya Angelou
Take a moment to consider how you deal with difference, imbalance, and/or injustice. You can consider it from your perspective as an individual and/or as part of a collective, a community… a republic. Either way you look at it, consider that your unique perspective – based on your past experiences – determines what you believe is a reasonable and rational way to deal with differences, imbalance, and/or injustice. Just to be clear: “past experiences” include everything you have felt, thought, said, done, and experienced around you. Past experiences make up your “mental impressions” (samskaras) – which, over time, can become vasanas, the “dwelling places” of our habits.
I was thinking about vasanas the other day when I heard Caroline Myss use the idea of living in a high rise as a metaphor for how we live in the world. The point she was making is that, if we live in the penthouse, we have a different understanding of the world and our circumstances than if we live on the first floor (or in the basement). Additionally, she talked about people not really caring about the problems people were having on other floors and she talked about perspective as it relates to the view outside, the vista. All of this made me think about how our perspectives determine how we resolve conflict.
Consider, if you will, that we “might be” in the habit of dealing with difference, imbalance, and/or injustice in ways that are not alleviating our suffering. I put “might be” in quotes, but let’s be real; if we look at some of the events that happened today in U. S. history (from 1862 to 1963 and beyond), we find a lot of suffering. Like a lot, a lot, of suffering. But, there’s not a whole lot of alleviation. We do, however, find dreams, hopes, promises, and possibilities.
As many of y’all know, I’m a big fan of “dwell[ing] in Possibility.” I sometimes wonder, however, at what point that idea becomes counterproductive. At what point do we have to pack up our baggage and move from unlimited possibilities to unlimited probability? At what point do we realize that moving means getting rid of some old, out-dated stuff that no longer serves us?
At what point do we recognize that the problems in the basement (and on the first floor) contribute to the problems in the penthouse – and vice versa? And, at what point do we recognize that we are all in the same dwelling place?
Better yet, at what point do we recognize that it’s time to move from dreams to reality?
“[We are our] ancestors’ wildest dreams!”
– variations attributed to Brandan Odums, Darius Simpson, and others
Please join me for a 65-minute virtual yoga practice on Zoom today (Sunday, August 28th) at 2:30 PM. You can use the link from the “Class Schedules” calendar if you run into any problems checking into the class. 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.
Sunday’s playlist is available on YouTube and Spotify. [Look for “08282021 The Heart’s Wildest Dream”]
“The place to improve the world is first in one’s own heart and head and hands, and then work outward from there.”
– quoted from Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance: An Inquiry into Values by Robert Pirsig
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.)
### To Have Wild Dreams, We Have to Live Wild Dreams ###
The Powerful Possibilities That Come From “A Brother’s Love” (an expanded and “renewed” Tuesday post) August 2, 2022
Posted by ajoyfulpractice in "Impossible" People, Art, Books, Changing Perspectives, Confessions, Healing Stories, Hope, James Baldwin, Life, Love, Maya Angelou, Men, Music, Pain, Science, Suffering, Super Heroes, Tragedy, Wisdom, Writing, Yoga.Tags: Aimee Lehto, America, Beau Lotto, being present, Boyd Croyner, Civil Rights, Emily Dickinson, inspiration, James Baldwin, Justin Timberlake, Maria Mitchell, Maya Angelou, Muhammad Ali, PRIDE, samskāras, truth, vasanas, yoga
add a comment
“This also, then, leads on to the idea of whether or not the brain ever does big jumps – or does it only ever do small steps? And the answer is that the brain only ever does small steps. I can only get from here to the other side of the room by passing through the space in between. I can’t teleport myself to the other side. Right? Similarly, your brain can only ever make small steps in its ideas. So, whenever you’re in a moment, it can only actually shift itself to the next most likely possible. And the next and most likely possible is determined by its assumptions. We call it ‘the space of possibility.’ Right. You can’t do just anything. Some things are just impossible for you in terms of your perception or in terms of your conception of the world. What’s possible is based on your history.”
– quoted from the 2017 Big Think video entitled, “The Neuroscience of Creativity, Perception, and Confirmation Bias by Beau Lotto
My idea to spend part of August focusing on “impossible people” – and by that I mean people who do things others believe to be impossible – started long before I had ever heard of neuroscientist Beau Lotto or his work with the Lab of Misfits. In some ways it started with an awareness of certain people’s lives and accomplishments and a curiosity about how they got from A (“impossible”) to Z (“possible”). I mean, on some level I knew about “the space of possibility” and I definitely understood the theory that we live in the past. It is, after all, the science of samskāras (“mental impressions”) and vasanas (the “dwelling places” of habits). I also understood the power of imagination and visualization; often referenced the idea that an epiphany (“striking appearance” or “manifestation”) happens because the mind-intellect is prepared for the revelation; and frequently highlighted how we can be like Emily Dickinson and “dwell in Possibility.”
All of that is backed up by Western science and the Yoga Philosophy. As Dr. Lotto pointed out in his book Deviate: The Science of Seeing Differently, and also in many of his talks and lectures, “We don’t see reality – we only see what was useful to see in the past. But the nature of the brain’s delusional past is this: The past that determines how you see isn’t just constituted by your lived perceptions but by your imagined ones as well. As such, you can influence what you see in the future just by thinking.” And that’s what I hadn’t really used as a point of focus: why some people’s imaginations allow them to think differently and know the baby steps that, to the rest of us, look like giant leaps.
If I were going to pinpoint a single starting point for my change in focus, it would be around July 31, 2016. It was the Feast Day of Saint Ignatius of Loyola and the eve of the anniversary of the birth of Miss Maria Mitchell (and Mr. Herman Melville), and while listening to Justin Timberlake (ostensibly) quote Muhammad Ali to a bunch of teens, I thought, “What combination of things in someone’s past makes their will and determination so strong? What makes someone recognize that “Impossible is just a word…?”
“Impossible is just a big word thrown around by small men who find it easier to live in the world they’ve been given than to explore the power they have to change it. Impossible is not a fact. It’s an opinion. Impossible is not a declaration. It’s a dare. Impossible is potential. Impossible is temporary.
Impossible is nothing.”
– quoted from a 2004 Adidas ad campaign written by Aimee Lehto (with final tag line credited to Boyd Croyner), often attributed to Muhammad Ali
A version of the following was originally posted as “A Brother’s Love” on August 2, 2020.
“Given the conditions in this country to be a black writer was impossible. When I was young, people thought you were not so much wicked as sick, they gave up on you. My father didn’t think it was possible—he thought I’d get killed, get murdered. He said I was contesting the white man’s definitions, which was quite right.”
– James Baldwin, quoted from the interview “James Baldwin, The Art of Fiction No. 78” by Jordan Elgrably (printed in The Paris Review, Issue 91, Spring 1984)
Born today in Harlem, New York, in 1924, the author James Baldwin was – by his own words – an impossible person. His life (and career) were, in so many ways, shaped by a combination of history and opinions. First, there was the history of the United States. Then there were the opinions of his stepfather David Baldwin (who he referred to as his father) about life in general plus his stepfather’s opinion of how the world would view him, how the world actually viewed him, and his own ideas about what was possible – or, what was necessary. He spent the ages of 14 – 17 following his father’s footsteps into the ministry and then, when his father died, he took a giant leap. He said, “Those were three years [preaching] which probably turned me to writing.”
Leaping into writing was not Mr. Baldwin’s only leap. He leapt across the pond to Paris, France, twice, even as his writing challenged Western society’s conceptions about race, class, gender, and sexuality. His essays, novels, and plays include Giovanni’s Room, Notes of a Native Son, The Fire Next Time, If Beale Street Could Talk (which was recently made into a movie) and the unfinished manuscript Remember This House (which was adapted to create the 2016 Academy Award-nominated documentary I Am Not Your Negro). Mr. Baldwin first went to Paris with $40 and not a lick of French. He was 24 years old, coming to grips with his sexuality, and escaping what he viewed – what he had witnessed – was a death sentence at the hands of American society.
“Not so metaphorically. Looking for a place to live. Looking for a job. You begin to doubt your judgment, you begin to doubt everything. You become imprecise. And that’s when you’re beginning to go under. You’ve been beaten, and it’s been deliberate. The whole society has decided to make you nothing. And they don’t even know they’re doing it.”
– James Baldwin, quoted from the interview “James Baldwin, The Art of Fiction No. 78” by Jordan Elgrably (printed in The Paris Review, Issue 91, Spring 1984)
From Paris, he was able to not only gain perspective about his experiences of being Black in America (and of being Black and Gay in America), but also to offer those experience back to the United States – in the form of a literary mirror. In words that very much echo Miss Maria Mitchell’s words, he said wanted to see himself, and be seen as, more than “merely a Negro; or, merely a Negro writer.”
In his late 30’s/early 40’s, Mr. Baldwin briefly returned to the United States and physically participated in the Civil Rights Movement and Gay Liberation Movement that he had (from Paris) helped to literally inspire. He became friends with Langston Hughes, Martin Luther King, Malcolm X, Medgar Evers, Lorraine Hansberry, Nikki Giovanni, and Nina Simone (who he and Mr. Hughes convinced to become active in the Civil Rights Movement). He worked with Drs. Kenneth and Mamie Clark, as well as Lena Horne and Miss Hansberry, to discuss the importance of civil rights legislation with President John F. Kennedy.
His friendships, however, were not only with Black artists and activists. He worked with his childhood friend Richard Avedon, marched with Marlon Brando and Charlton Heston, collaborated with Margaret Mead and Sol Stein, and also knew Rip Torn, Jean-Paul Sartre, and Dorothea Tanning. In fact, to read a biography or autobiography of James Baldwin is to read a Who’s Who of activism and artistry in the 20th century. But, you don’t have to settle for a reading a measly biography. If you can get your hands on the 1,884 pages of documents compiled by the FBI, you would be in for quite a treat.
Yes, you read that correctly. For a little over a decade, the FBI collected nearly two thousand pages worth of documents on a man that many Americans may not realize helped convince President Kennedy to send federal troops to defend the civil rights activists marching from Selma to Montgomery. True, it’s not the well-over 17,000 pages they compiled on Martin Luther King (not including the wire-tap documents). Here, however, is some perspective: the FBI only collected 276 pages on authors like Richard Wright (Native Son) and 110 pages on authors like Truman Capote (In Cold Blood) and Henry Miller (Tropic of Cancer). Additionally, FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover showed a particular interest in Mr. Baldwin and actually worked with agents to figure out ways they could ban Mr. Baldwin’s 1962 novel Another Country.
Perhaps Director Hoover was concerned about the fact that James Baldwin started the novel while living in Greenwich Village and continued as he moved back to Paris and then back to the States again, before ultimately finishing the book in Istanbul, Turkey. Perhaps he was concerned about the novels depictions of bisexuality, interracial relationships, and extramarital affairs. It’s just as likely that J. Edgar Hoover was concerned about James Baldwin’s persistent efforts to depict a deep, abiding, almost Divine, brotherly love; a universal experience of grace and growth that would make more things possible for more people. Whatever the FBI Director’s objections might have been, the report of the Justice Department’s General Crimes Section “concluded that the book contains literary merit and may be of value to students of psychology and social behavior.”
“The occurrence of an event is not the same thing as knowing what it is that one has lived through. Most people had not lived — nor could it, for that matter, be said that they had died– through any of their terrible events. They had simply been stunned by the hammer. They passed their lives thereafter in a kind of limbo of denied and unexamined pain. The great question that faced him this morning was whether or not had had ever, really, been present at his life.”
– quoted from Another Country by James Baldwin
“I imagine one of the reasons people cling to their hates so stubbornly is because they sense, once hate is gone, they will be forced to deal with pain.”
– quoted from The Fire Next Time by James Baldwin
When so many of his friends, who were also the leaders of the Civil Rights Movement, were killed, Mr. Baldwin made his second leap back to Paris. Again, it was a leap made out of fear and the basic desire to survive. His grief, anger, horror, and disappointment are all on full display in later works like If Beale Street Could Talk, Just Above My Head, and the 1985 non-fiction book Evidence of Things Not Seen (about the Atlanta child murders). Yet, until his dying day he wrote about love and hope – even using a portion of the Epistle to the Hebrews, from the Christian New Testament, as the title of his book about the Atlanta child murders.
Another place where you can see Mr. Baldwin’s devotion to love, life, and humanity is in the words of his friends; people, who actually knew him, were inspired by him, and some of whom called him Jim or Jimmy. When he died in 1987, Maya Angelou wrote a tribute for The New York Times, entitled “James Baldwin: His Voice Remembered; Life In His Language.” In addition to describing how Mr. Baldwin introduced her to his family as his mother’s newest daughter, she explained that he “opened the [unusual] door” and encouraged her to tell her story.
“Well, the season was always Christmas with you there and, like one aspect of that scenario, you did not neglect to bring at least three gifts. You gave me a language to dwell in, a gift so perfect it seems my own invention….
The second gift was your courage, which you let us share: the courage of one who would go as a stranger in the village and transform the distances between people into intimacy with the whole world; courage to understand that experience in ways that made it a personal revelation for each of us…. Yours was the courage to live life in and from its belly as well as beyond its edges, to see and say what was, to recognize and identify evil, but never fear or stand in awe of it….
The third gift was hard to fathom and even harder to accept. It was your tenderness – a tenderness so delicate that I thought it could not last, but last it did and envelop me it did. In the midst of anger it tapped me lightly like the child in Tish’s womb…. Yours was a tenderness, of vulnerability, that asked everything, expected everything and, like the world’s own Merlin, provided us with the ways and means to deliver. I suppose that was why I was always a bit better behaved around you, smarter, more capable, wanting to be worth the love you lavished, and wanting to be steady enough to bear while it broke your heart, wanting to be generous enough to join your smile with one of my own, and reckless enough to jump on in that laugh you laughed. Because our joy and our laughter were not only all right, they were necessary.”
– quoted from “James Baldwin: His Voice Remembered; Life In His Language” by Maya Angelou (printed in The New York Times Book Review December 20, 1987)
Please join me today (Tuesday, August 2nd) at 12:00 PM or 7:15 PM for a yoga practice on Zoom. You can use the link from the “Class Schedules” calendar if you run into any problems checking into the class. 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.
Tuesday’s playlist is available on YouTube and Spotify. [Look for “Langston’s Theme for Jimmy 2022”]
NOTE: In 2020, I had to cancel some of this week’s practices and, therefore, did not post the variation of my “Langston Hughes” playlist that I normally use on this date. However, I did encouraged people to practice (with those aforementioned gifts and especially the second and third gifts – with courage and tenderness that has you lifting the corners of your mouth up to your ears and laughing out loud). Last year, today fell on a Monday and so, again, I did not post a playlist.
While I have now posted a variation of what I’ve used in the past, you are still welcome to use my “Selma to Montgomery” playlist, which is available on YouTube and Spotify or, as I mentioned in 2020, you could grab some Nina Simone, Lena Horne, Harry Belafonte (“Merci Bon Dieu” comes to mind, of course), Sammy Davis, Jr., and Joan Baez – and then mix in some of the jazz from today’s playlist.
“I love America more than any other country in this world, and, exactly for this reason, I insist on the right to criticize her perpetually.”
“Love takes off masks that we fear we cannot live without and know we cannot live within. I use the word love here not merely in the personal sense but as a state of being or a state of grace – not in the infantile American sense of being made happy but in the tough and universal sense of quest and daring and growth….Love is a growing up.”
– James Baldwin
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.)
### OPEN THE DOOR, & LET ME IN (OR OUT)! ###
FTWMI: Introducing….You July 11, 2022
Posted by ajoyfulpractice in Books, Changing Perspectives, Healing Stories, Life, Movies, Philosophy, William Shakespeare, Wisdom, Writing, Yoga.Tags: 8-Limbs, Bob Minzesheimer, Charlotte's Web, Cicero, Diogenes, E. B. White, Jhumpa Lahiri, Minke, Nathaniel Hawthorne, Nikolai Gogol, Pope John II, Rynx, samskāras, Socrates, svadyaya, Teresa Wiltz, The Elements of Style, The Namesake, Ursula Nordstrom, William Strunk Jr., yoga philosophy, yoga practice, Yoga Sutra, Yoga Sutra 2.28
add a comment
The following was originally posted in July of 2021. Class details have been updated.
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.)
“Saepe est etiam sub pallĭolo sordĭdo sapientia.
*
[English translation: Wisdom often is under a filthy cloak.]”
*
– Latin proverb (associated with Socrates, Diogenes, and Cicero)
Imagine, for a moment, that you are meeting someone for the first time. It is also the very first time you’ve seen them – and maybe you are meeting them in a cold place during winter or a rainy place during the rainy season. Either way, you are both wearing overcoats. You’re also both of a certain age, whatever that means to you at this moment. So, you’re meeting not at the beginning of your stories but in the middle, maybe even at the end.
We may not think about it, but this is how we most often meet – in the middle of our stories and without being able to see what’s inside.
We exchange names and, if we know someone else with said name, we start seeing this new person through the layers and layers of previously formed ideas, impressions, and opinions. That’s just the way the mind-body works. If, however, we are each the first person either of us has met with said names, we start forming ideas, impressions, and opinions about a person with said name. That’s just the way the mind-body works.
We may not even be consciously aware of it, but there it is. Our first sense of someone is based on an overcoat, samskaras (mental impressions), whatever is happening in the middle of the story, and a name – that may or may not be their given name (or, under certain circumstances, may or may not be the name by which most people know them). The overcoat in this case is, literally, an article of clothing – and also all the external factors like the samskaras, the name, and anything else we may know or assume based on the situation (like occupation, vocation, race, ethnicity, gender, and age range).
Over time, the overcoat comes off, literally and figuratively. We make more mental impressions, maybe we learn another name, and as we move through the rest of the story we also learn (in a backwards sense) about the beginning of a person’s story: why they are the way they are; think and do the things they think and do. Over time, we go deeper.
“Pleased to meet you
But I’m quick to judge
I hope you drop the grudge
I know I’m not what you want from me”
*
– quoted from the song “Pleased to Meet You” by Rynx (featuring Minke)
Every practice is an opportunity to introduce (or reintroduce) you to yourself. Every pose, every sequence, allows you to remove the layers and layers of overcoats until you reach the heart and core of who you are. That’s svādhyāya, “self-study.”
Sometimes, I also use the practice to introduce (or reintroduce) people to different philosophical aspects of the practice – as I did this time last year – and/or to various rituals and traditions. I also use the practice to introduce (or reintroduce) people to some of my favorite people. People like two writers who share a birthday and, obviously, an occupation. Both of these writers just happen to be Pulitzer Prize winners; have ties to The New Yorker magazine; and are mostly recognized by (first) names that are not on their passports and birth certificates.
Remember, their names are part of their overcoats.
Elwyn Brooks White was born July 11, 1899, in Mount Vernon, New York. Nilanjana Sudeshna Lahiri was born July 11, 1967, in London, England. While very different in some ways, their books prove that anyone can be the hero (or heroine) of a great story; that situations we’ve never personally encountered can be highly relatable when related by a good storyteller; and that fiction (like yoga) can be a great way to process difficult emotions.
“That’s the thing about books. They let you travel without moving your feet.”
*
– quoted from The Namesake by Jhumpa Lahiri
*
“Place yourself in the background; do not explain too much; prefer the standard to the offbeat.”
– quoted from “An Approach to style” by E. B. White published in The Elements of Style by William Strunk Jr. and E. B. White
Even though most readers know him by his initials, E. B. White was known to friends and professional colleagues as “Andy.” Ostensibly, the nickname came about because of a tradition at Cornell University whereby students with the last name “White” are renamed after the university’s co-founder Andrew Dickson White.
Jhumpa Lahiri’s birth name is not known to many of her readers – and for a similar reason: her name was also “changed” at school. However, in her case, the change came because her name was unfamiliar (rather than so familiar). Dr. Lahiri’s parents migrated from West Bengal, India to the United Kingdom. When the author was three, the family migrated to Kingston, Rhode Island – where at least one teacher was unfamiliar Bengali names and unwilling to learn how to pronounce them. According to an August 19, 2003, USA Today article by Bob Minzesheimer, “[A kindergarten teacher] said something like ‘That’s kind of a long name’ and decided it was easier to pronounce ‘Jhumpa’” – her nickname.
Remember, names are part of our overcoats. What we call each other makes a difference in how we see and understand each other.
“SOME PIG”
“TERRIFIC”
“RADIANT”
“HUMBLE”
*
– quoted from the messages in the web in Charlotte’s Web by E. B. White (illustrated by Garth Williams)
When Charlotte (the spider) comes up with her plan to save Wilbur, she says, “Why, how perfectly simple.” She then goes on to use her experience (as a master weaver) to introduce (and reintroduce) her friend (the pig) in a way that makes him more valuable alive, rather than dead. Her plan is, in fact, perfectly simple: write what you know… and change the overcoat. Even through their details are different, the stories written by both E. B. White and Jhumpa Lahiri are about their own personal experiences… and what happens when we get underneath the outer layers.
E. B. White is remembered as the author of beloved (and sometimes banned) children’s books like Stuart Little and Charlotte’s Web, but he started off as a journalist. He also worked for an advertising agency (and in some non-literary jobs) before submitting manuscripts for the then newly-founded The New Yorker. He eventually became a writer and contributing editor for the magazine. It was during his tenure at The New Yorker that he got a blast from his (Cornell University) past when he was asked to update work by one of his former professors.
The Elements of Style (sometimes called White & Strunk’s Elements of Style) was originally composed and self-published by William Strunk Jr. for his English students at Cornell University. It contained what Dr. Strunk Jr. considered the fundamentals: “Seven rules of usage, eleven principles of composition, a few matters of form, and a list of words and expressions commonly misused [and/or misspelled]….” When it was published by Harcourt, Brace & Howe in 1920, it included eight “elementary rules of usage,” ten “elementary principles of composition,” “a few matters of form,” a list of 49 “words and expressions commonly misused,” and a list of 57 “words often misspelled.” In the late 1950’s, Macmillan Publishers commissioned Mr. White to expand and modernize “the little book” (partially based on a 1935 edition by William Strunk Jr. and Edward A. Tenney). Since its 1959 publication, White & Strunk’s Elements of Style has been reprinted three times, illustrated, and served as the inspiration for an opera and a comprehensive history.
Mr. White won a Newberry Award, an American Academy of Arts and Letters Gold Medal, a Presidential Freedom Award, a Laura Ingalls Wilder Award, a National Medal for Literature, and a L. L. Winship/PEN New England Award. He was also awarded a Pulitzer Prize Special Citation for Letters, an award that actually recognized all of his work. In 2004, the Association of Booksellers for Children (ABC) even established an award in his honor for books that “embodied the universal read aloud standards that were created by [his work].” You might think all of those accolades meant that Mr. White always followed his own advice. But, let’s be real: talking farm animals, airplane-flying mice, and Public Relations specialists who just happen to be spiders wasn’t very standard in 1945 and 1952.
“No, I have never encountered any story plot like Charlotte’s Web. I do not believe that any other writer has ever told about a spider writing words in its web. Perhaps I should ask some of the children’s book ladies who go back even further in time than I do, but I am sure nothing even remotely like this has been written.”
– quoted from a letter addressed to “Andy” (E. B. White), from Ursula Nordstrom, Harper & Row publisher and editor-in-chief, Department of Books for Boys and Girls (dated April 2, 1952, as it appears in Dear Genuis: The Letters of Ursula Nordstrom)
*
“It used to be clear to me, slopping a pig, that as far as the pig was concerned I could not be counted on, and this, as I say, troubled me. Anyway, the theme of “Charlotte’s Web” is that a pig shall be saved, and I have an idea that somewhere deep inside me there was a wish to that effect.
*
As for Charlotte herself, I had never paid much attention to spiders until a few years ago…. Spiders are skilful [sic], amusing and useful, and only in rare instances has anybody ever come to grief because of a spider.”
*
“I haven’t told why I wrote the book, but I haven’t told you why I sneeze, either. A book is a sneeze”.
*
– quoted from a letter addressed to Ursula Nordstrom, Harper & Row publisher and editor-in-chief (Department of Books for Boys and Girls), from E. B. White (dated September 29, 1952)
The January 1948 issue of The Atlantic contained an essay by E. B. White entitled, “Death of a Pig,” which described the short life and “premature expiration of a pig” – as well as the burial and how the whole community mourned the occasion. In the essay, Mr. White said, “I have written this account in penitence and in grief, as a man who failed to raise his pig, and to explain my deviation from the classic course of so many raised pigs.“ While there is no mention of a spider in the essay – and he doesn’t specifically mention a pig dying in his September 29, 1952 letter to Ursula Nordstrom, his publisher / editor – many believed that the essay wasn’t enough and that he felt the need to write more in order to express his sorrow and regret, to process his feelings about his experiences. On the other hand, it doesn’t take a letter to an editor (or a fan) to see how Jhumpa Lahiri has also used fiction to process personal experiences.
“In Bengali the word for pet name is daknam, meaning, literally, the name by which one is called, by friends, family, and other intimates, at home and in other private, unguarded moments. Pet names are a persistent remnant of childhood, a reminder that life is not always so serious, so formal, so complicated. They are a reminder, too, that one is not all things to all people.”
*
– quoted from The Namesake by Jhumpa Lahiri
Despite having conflicted feelings associated with her name and schooling, Jhumpa Lahiri went on to earn a B. A. in English literature from Barnard College of Columbia University and four degrees from Boston University. A few years after completing her doctorial thesis, Jhumpa Lahiri’s Interpreter of Maladies became the seventh collection of short stories (in 82 years) to win the Pulitzer Prize in Fiction. (There have now been only nine collections to win the award in over 100 years.) Several years after her award-winning debut, The New Yorker published her short story entitled, “The Namesake.” It was the story of a Bengali boy living in a strange land with a strange name.
The story became a book and then a movie and, in the process, “Jhumpa Lahiri” became a household name.
In addition to winning a Pulitzer Prize, Jhumpa Lahiri’s accolades include a PEN/Hemingway Award, a Frank O’Connor International Story, and the National Humanities Award. She has also been a finalist for the Man Booker Prize and the National Book Award for Fiction. Her second collection of short stories, Unaccustomed Earth, debuted at number one on The New York Times best seller list – an achievement one book editor associated with her “newfound commercial clout,” but an achievement (I would humbly suggests) actually rests on the beauty and clarity of her storytelling. As one critic put it, “There is nothing accidental about her success; her plots are as elegantly constructed as a fine proof in mathematics.”
Unaccustomed Earth was also named number one by the editors of The New York Times Book Review’s “10 Best Books of 2008.” Perhaps, even more telling is the fact that when the collection won the Frank O’Connor International Story award that same year, there was no shortlist because, as reported by The Guardian on July 4, 2008, “The jurors decided that Unaccustomed Earth was so plainly the best book that they would jump straight from longlist to winner….” The Frank O’Connor award was one of the world’s richest awards for short story collections and normally had a longlist of approximately 60 books and a short list of three or four.
“In so many ways, his family’s life feels like a string of accidents, unforeseen, unintended, one incident begetting another…They were things for which it was impossible to prepare but which one spent a lifetime looking back at, trying to accept, interpret, comprehend. Things that should never have happened, that seemed out of place and wrong, these were what prevailed, what endured, in the end.”
*
― quoted from The Namesake by Jhumpa Lahiri
Jhumpa Lahiri is a polyglot who speaks Bengali, English, and Italian. She, undoubtedly, also understands a little bit of Spanish (and maybe Greek). Not only has she written and translated work in (and out) of all three of the languages she speaks, in 2015 she wrote an essay for The New Yorker stating that she was now only writing in Italian. Since 2015, she has published two books in Italian and edited and translated at least two collections of work by Italian writers.
Dr. Lahiri’s love of language is obvious not only in the languages she speaks and writes, but also in the connections that she makes through her writing. Both The Namesake and Unaccustomed Earth have ties to two of her literary predecessors: Nikolai Gogol and Nathaniel Hawthorne. Some people might be confused by her success with the “masses,” because she is so clearly erudite. However, above and beyond anything else, what a reader finds in Jhumpa Lahiri’s books are regular, everyday people navigating the spaces between two worlds and two identities – just like she does. (Just like E. B. White’s characters do.)
“Writing was also an escape [for Jhumpa Lahiri]. Growing up brown and ‘foreign’ in a town where white was the predominant theme had its challenges. There was the persistent feeling of other, not American enough, not Indian enough, of constantly straddling fences, stretching identities. She is amused, and slightly annoyed, by Indians who immigrate to the United States and eagerly embrace a Caucasian identity, excitedly reporting to their Indian friends that they’d moved into an all-white neighborhood, where there were no blacks. Thanks to her parents — her mother would often retort to these friends, ‘What do you think you are?’ — she said, ‘I was never into any sort of denial.’”
*
– quoted from The Washington Post article entitled, “The Writer Who Began with a Hyphen” by Teresa Wiltz (dated October 8, 2003)
Please join me today (Monday, July 11th) at 5:30 PM for a 75-minute virtual yoga practice on Zoom. Use the link from the “Class Schedules” calendar if you run into any problems checking into the class. You can request an audio recording of this practice via a comment below or by emailing myra (at) ajoyfulpractice.com.
There is no playlist for the Common Ground practice.
The previously used playlist for this practice is available on YouTube and Spotify. [Look for “07112020 An Introduction”]
”His family name was Bashmachkin. It is evident from the name, that it originated in bashmak (shoe); but when, at what time, and in what manner, is not known. His father and grandfather, and even his brother-in-law, and all the Bashmachkins, always wore boots, and only had new heels two or three times a year. His name was Akakii Akakievich. It may strike the reader as rather singular and far-fetched; but he may feel assured that it was by no means far-fetched, and that the circumstances were such that it would have been impossible to give him any other name; and this was how it came about.”
*
– quoted from “The Overcoat” (as it appears in The Overcoat & Other Short Stories, Dover Thrift Editions) by Nikolai Gogol (story translation by Isabel F. Hapgood)
*
[The 2020 post for July 11th is linked above. Here’s different post related to the naming of things.]
*
### “Juliet: ‘Tis but thy name that is my enemy;” WS ###
The Source of the Reflection (mostly the music w/some links) July 2, 2022
Posted by ajoyfulpractice in Music, Philosophy, Yoga.Tags: gunas, prakiti, purusha, samskāras, T. K. V. Desikachar, Thurgood Marshall, vasanas, Yoga Sutra 1.39, Yoga Sutra 2.3, Yoga Sutra 4.21, Yoga Sutras 2.17-2.20, Yoga Sutras 4.1-4.14, Yoga Sutras 4.15-4.20
add a comment
“The mind can of course influence the perception of an object. This object has an independent existence apart from the source of perception. If we insist on the concept of the mind from moment to moment being the source, the means, and the object of perception, we face problems in comprehending the possibility of one person remembering what he saw in the past, sharing what he has seen, and reconciling the fact that one object seen by one person is not necessarily seen by another or in the same way.”
*
— quoted from the commentary on Yoga Sūtra 4.21 in The Heart of Yoga: Developing a Personal Practice by T. K. V. Desikachar
Please join me for a 90-minute virtual yoga practice on Zoom today (Saturday, July 2nd) at 12:00 PM. Use the link from the “Class Schedules” calendar if you run into any problems checking into the class. You can request an audio recording of this practice via a comment below or by emailing myra (at) ajoyfulpractice.com.
Saturday’s playlist is available on YouTube and Spotify. [Look for “07012020 Caesar Rodney’s Ride”]
NOTE: The Spotify track has been updated.
“What’s at stake here is more than the rights of my client. It’s the moral commitment stated in our country’s creed.”
*
– Thurgood Marshall (b. 7/2/1908), NAACP attorney for plaintiff in Murray v. Pearson, 169 Md. 478, 182 A. 590 (1936)
We could reflect on today as it is related to1776, 1839, or 1908.
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.)
### 🎶 ###
Think of All the Things that Make the Mind Think (mostly the music w/some links) June 25, 2022
Posted by ajoyfulpractice in Music, Philosophy, Yoga.Tags: Anne Frank, gunas, prakiti, purusha, samskāras, vasanas, Yoga Sutra 1.39, Yoga Sutra 2.3, Yoga Sutra 4.18, Yoga Sutra 4.19, Yoga Sutra 4.20, Yoga Sutras 2.17-2.20, Yoga Sutras 4.1-4.14, Yoga Sutras 4.15-17
add a comment
“It’s difficult in times like these: ideals, dreams and cherished hopes rise within us, only to be crushed by grim reality. It’s a wonder I haven’t abandoned all my ideals, they seem so absurd and impractical. Yet I cling to them because I still believe, in spite of everything, that people are truly good at heart. I simply can’t build my hopes on a foundation of confusion, misery, and death. I hear the approaching thunder that, one day, will destroy us too. I feel the suffering of millions. And yet, when I look up at the sky, I somehow feel that this cruelty too shall end, and that peace & tranquility will return once again.”
*
— Anne Frank, written in her diary (“Kitty”) on July 15, 1944
Please join me for a 90-minute virtual yoga practice on Zoom today (Saturday, June 25th) at 12:00 PM. Use the link from the “Class Schedules” calendar if you run into any problems checking into the class. You can request an audio recording of this practice via a comment below or by emailing myra (at) ajoyfulpractice.com.
Saturday’s playlist is available on YouTube and Spotify.
NOTE: The opening tracks are slightly different as some music was not available on Spotify.
Anne Frank’s diary (“Kitty”) was published today in 1947. It is a collection of her thoughts as well as a chronicle of some of her final days. You can see a date-related post here and another theme-related post here.
“The best remedy for those who are afraid, lonely, or unhappy is to go outside, somewhere where they can be quite alone with the heavens, nature, and God…. As long as [the simple beauty of Nature] exists, and it certainly always will, I know that then there will always be comfort for every sorrow, whatever the circumstances may be. And I firmly believe that nature brings solace in all troubles.”
*
— Anne Frank, written in her diary (“Kitty”) on Wednesday, February 23, 1944
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.)