Photo: A Sri Lankan-styled Buddha image atop an office cubicle

Settled but upright
Silent but mindful
Still but radiant

In the ‘Watchmen’ graphic novel and movie, is an intriguing vigilante character called Rorschach. Yes, you guessed it – his name was inspired by the Rorschach Test, which is also popularly known as the inkblot test, where black ink is splattered randomly on a piece of white paper and folded into half to create whatever symmetrical image that takes shape. Showing a number of such images to a psychologically perturbed person is used as a test to discern what he or she is preoccupied with. It works (but not always?) because by the power of perception, we tend to see what we want to see, or already keep seeing in our minds.

In the novel, Rorschach wears a full face mask made from a special fabric that uses two pressure and heat-sensitive liquids suspended between a layer of latex, which create black-on-white shifting color patterns, ‘always changing, never mixing into grey’. In other words, his face is the very three-dimensional expression of a Rorschach Test that keeps morphing with his physical and mental (emotional) changes. He dons it most of the time, and is in fact, rather attached to it, because he considers it as his true face – a poker face of change. When he is later unmasked in the story, we realise what his ‘real’ face is like doesn’t really matter, because it too changes in time.

(Rorschach quote in poster above as tagline – ‘The city is afraid of me. I’ve seen it’s true face.’ But has Rorschach seen his own true face in the first place?) In a sense, we are not unlike Rorschach, because we too are shape-shifting creatures. Physically, we are changing from moment to moment, at the cellular and molecular/sub-atomic level. Mentally, we are changing from moment to moment, from one thought to another. Also like Rorschach, we do know the truth that we change, but only to some extent, while we still cling to certain aspects of our delusions, such as the belief that there is an (illusory) ego to protect.

In Rorschach’s case, he clings to ‘moral absolutism’, where he too clearly differentiates the good from the evil, going to the full extent to punish the evil, forgetting that forgiveness is also good, that vengeance is also evil, that there is potential for the evil to repent to be good, that there is potential for the good to become evil. Ironically, his version of ‘moral objectivism’ becomes moral ambiguity at times, making him more grey or even black than white without him being mindful of it. When does righteousness becomes tainted with self-delusions to become self-righteousness? If you’ve watched ‘Watchmen’, what did you see in Rorschach? He is a Rorschach Test for you!

Related Articles:

Who Watches the Watchmen?
http://www.moonpointer.com/index.php?itemid=713
See What You Want to See
http://www.moonpointer.com/index1.php?itemid=661
Playing the Angel or Demon?
http://www.moonpointer.com/index.php?itemid=1338
An Online Rorschach Test!
http://theinkblot.com

The 17th Karmapa’s Kagyu office produced an impressive booklet called ‘Guidelines for Mitigating Climate Change’. I received it via email as an attachment file from a Dharma friend, who cc-ed it to a few other friends too. It happened that all of them are vegetarians. I could not resist sending the below to the sender, who is a stubborn meat-eater and admits his ongoing caving in to cravings for meat, but does little to resist, while even occasionally telling us about ‘yummy’ meat treats. Ironically, he hangs a big portrait of the Karmapa in his hall at home (as above) and had attended his teachings in person, during the period when he began seriously advocating the importance of eating less meat. (Sadly, even if he reads this post, which is unlikely, he is likely to just shrug it off.)

On page 21:

Eat less meat or become completely vegetarian: In simplest terms, food is energy and the food that requires the least amount of energy to produce is vegetarian: grains, vegetables, pulses, fruits and so on. Animals that live on plants take energy from the earth. Those of us who eat meat take up even more energy than these animals. People should consider giving up meat not only to practice compassion for animals, but also to reduce the burden they are putting on the Earth. All Kagyu monasteries practice vegetarianism–they should also encourage individuals to cultivate compassion for all living things and lighten the load the Earth already carries.

Consider heeding the advice of the 6th Buddha la! (It was prophesised that the 17th Karmapa will be the Buddha after Maitreya Bodhisattva becomes Buddha.) Not nagging at you… I’m only following his advice in red above to encourage you! Amituofo.

Related Article:

2007 Talk on Vegetarianism by the 17th Karmapa
http://moonpointer.com/bvf.php?itemid=2285

Gee: You’re too skinny! Let me transfer some fat to you! (Reverse liposuction!!?)
Cee: Nooo! Thank goodness only merits can be transferred (shared)!
Mee: That’s why good is more powerful than evil!

Actually, there are other things that can be transferred too – like money and viruses… but you get the idea! What you get via transference is a result of your karma too. So there’s only you to karmically blame if you get something bad from someone.

Some eat to live, some live to eat, but you can eat towards enlightenment!

Disclaimer: The diet described here has not yet been scientifically endorsed. If you have a medical condition, you might wish to seek your doctor’s advice before trying! I ate lunch today at 3pm. Or was it tunch (tea plus lunch) or an early dinner? It doesn’t really matter what you call it. I call my eating style the ‘Zen Diet’. It is based upon two celebrated teachings by Master Baizang – ‘When hungry, eat. (When tired, sleep.)’ and ‘One day without work, one day without food.’ How does this work? Instead of looking at an external clock as to when to eat, we look at our internal clock. The moment you are hungry is precisely the time to eat. No regular meals are skipped as there are not regulated ones! Finally! A dieting system that doesn’t require you to skip any meal!

But how does this help weight loss? What if you’re hungry ‘all the time’? Here is where mindfulness comes in. ‘When hungry, eat.’ We need to be aware of whether we are truly hungry. The reverse of the saying is equally valid – ‘When not hungry, don’t eat’ and ‘When no longer hungry, stop eating.’ With mindfulness, we would know when to start eating, and when to stop! The Zen Diet is not just for those who wish to slim down, but for everyone who wishes to live a simpler but more naturalistic life, where there are no enforced or contrived meals or mealtimes, thus freeing up more time, while saving more food and energy. With mindfulness as the key to discern need from greed, the Zen Diet can definitely be part of spiritual practice too.

If we eat according to the Middle Path, we would eat only the ideal foods in the right amount – neither too much to cause sensual indulgence nor too little to cause self-mortification. It is wise to eat only when hungry because depending on our energy input and output, we are not always hungry at fixed times. As such, why eat too early or too late? Next, how can we practise the ‘No work, no food’ teaching? We should work ethically and earnestly to deserve our food, and harness the energy from our food for our ultimate work - of bettering our spiritual practice, to advance towards enlightenment for the sake of one and all. With such a clear purpose in life, the why, when, what and how of eating would all fall into place!

Our work is for supporting the spiritual life.
Our true work is furthering the spiritual life. - Stonepeace

Related Articles:

Why ‘No Work, No Food’?
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/zeph/message/751
The Five Contemplations of Food
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/zeph/message/374
A Kinder Zen Diet: Shojin Ryori
http://moonpointer.com/new/2009/02/gastronomy-shojin-ryori
The Zen Meal that Took Some Time
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/zeph/message/707

Here is an analysis of the poll question ‘Do you believe you have a soulmate?’ As of today, the results are:

53% : Yes
30% : No
17% : Don’t know

According to Wikipedia, “‘Soulmate’ is a term sometimes used to designate someone with whom one has a feeling of deep and natural affinity, love, intimacy, sexuality, spirituality, and/or compatibility. A related concept is that of the twin flame or twin soul – which is thought to be the ultimate soulmate, the one and only other half of one’s soul, for which all souls are driven to find and join. However, not everyone who uses these terms intends them to carry such mystical connotations.”

As such, what makes a soulmate one is ambiguous and up to personal definition and usage of the term, while Buddhism neither teaches that there is any ‘soul’ (as all beings change), nor that there definitely someone ‘predestined’ in an ideal way for everyone, though there will always be karmic encounters with many kinds of people (in positive, negative and neutral ways, with varying intensities subject to change by our present attitude). The analysis is proposed to be done in an open-ended way with these reflective questions.

1. Why ‘must’ the ‘soulmate’ we imagine to have be of a preferred gender and appearance?
2. Why ‘must’ it be possible to literally mate with this ‘soulmate’?
3. Why ‘must’ our relationship with our ‘soulmate’ be both worldly and spiritual?
4. Is the above so because we wish to have the best of both worlds?
5. Is the above a reflection of worldly greed mixed with spiritual aspiration?
6. Does the above clash ideologically or can they be reconciled harmoniously?
7. Why do we not consider the Buddha our soulmate?

Whether we believe we have a ‘soulmate’ or not, it is our karma that decides whether we meet or deserve the ‘best’ partner we have in mind or not. Romantically linked or not, the most important relationship is spiritual friendship, which all kinds of relationships should work towards. (In a way, my full answer to the poll question is summarised in the first link below.

Related Articles:

Do You Have a ‘Soulmate’ Out There Waiting for You? (An Karmic Analysis)
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/thedailyenlightenment-realisation/message/215
Why Was There Tension ‘When Harry Met Sally’?
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/thedailyenlightenment-realisation/message/360
Ladies & Gentlemen!
http://moonpointer.com/new/2009/01/translation-ladies-gentlemen

Fai: My casual observation: both ‘practice’ and ‘studies’ seems to work well as means for ego inflation. I have met both ‘serious meditators/ practitioners’ as well as Buddhist scholars who have very big egos and think the world of themselves. 

Me: [Thoughts upon reading the above] When anyone considers oneself a ‘serious scholar’ or a ‘serious meditator/ practitioner’, chances are that s/he has taken his/her ‘self’ too seriously. And the irony is that such seriousness based on self impedes true advancement in one’s work and practice. The self is always in the way till it’s realised to be illusory. Paradoxically,

A truly serious Dharma practitioner
would realise that
there is no one* who practises the Dharma seriously.

- Stonepeace

In the movie ‘Suspect X’, a brilliant mathematician plans an elaborate scheme that involves murder to help his love interest get away with manslaughter. When one is driven so much by love that it involves killing another, is such love still healthy? Is such love ‘lovely’ or lovable? Would it be more touching or disturbing? Is such love True Love? If yes, how can True Love for one necessitate hate for another? (In Buddhist psychology, there must be some hate generated for killing to be done, while intelligence does not equate to wisdom.)

At first glance, one might think this man had done a great sacrifice out of love, as he would very likely become a murder suspect. But this is not really untainted True Love, because it has elements of great attachment (to the beloved), great aversion (towards the possibility of the beloved being held responsible, thus being held away) and great delusion (about how love should be expressed). One who has True Love would sacrifice one’s own attachment, aversion and delusion instead of anyone, while generating the opposite qualities of generosity, loving-kindness and wisdom respectively.

Understanding Amituofo via the Amitabha Sutra

We often hear Buddhists greet each other with ‘Amituofo’ and aspiring to be reborn in the Western Pure Land. We also hear that this practice is a powerful and equalitarian way for most people to advance towards enlightenment, especially in our day and age. So who is Amitabha Buddha (Amituofo), who founded the Western Pure Land, and what did he teach? How is he similar or different from the historical Shakyamuni Buddha, who introduced us to him? Come join us, and discover more about the precious Pure Land teachings, on how they might just be what busy urbanites like us need.

Date: 6 Saturdays: 14/03 – 18/04/09
Time: 7.00pm till 9.30pm
Venue: Classroom 5 & 6, Level 1
Venerable Hong Choon Memorial Hall
Kong Meng San Phor Kark See Monastery

Read more

A Dharma friend recounted the first time she stepped into a Chinese Buddhist temple out of interest to learn chanting. The chanting session was probably about to start, and there were rows of prayer cushions for kneeling. While navigating around, she straddled over a cushion with a Sutra chanting text on it, without even being aware it was there. (In many Asian cultures, not really of Buddhist origin, placing one’s feet towards or over a person or item worthy of respect is deemed rude, as the feet are the lowest and dirtiest part of the body.)

An old lady devotee spots her doing that and sends torrents of scoldings in her direction… and it doesn’t just stop. She rants on and on… probably in a dialect. Thankfully, despite this, this friend was wise enough to discern the difference between the valuable teachings of Buddhism and a mere example of an overly uptight and conservative Buddhist (who was not at all conservative with her scoldings). She was not forgiven but she forgave her begrudging nature. She thus strove on to learn chanting. That said, there are several things very ironically wrong with such an incident:

1. Who is more wrong? The one who accidentally ‘shows’ lack of respect via not mindfully observing a custom, or the one who purposely hurls much abuse?
2. Who deserves more respect, the one who calmly acknowledges a mistake and takes in abuse or the one who complains relentlessly for proper respect?
3. Why did the devotee not extend welcome to a newcomer and explain the custom to her, instead of almost casting her out?
4. Who is real devotee? The one devoted to learn despite the obstacle created by that devotee, or that obstacle-causing devotee?
5. How could the devotee be so unforgiving, if she really practised the Buddha’s teachings of compassion as an ‘old-timer’?
6. Something is deemed morally wrong only when there are ill intentions involved, and the one with ill will was the devotee!
7. The custom of not walking over sacred objects is still just a custom. The Buddha would discourage such unhealthy attachment to rites and rituals.

Above: [Stele with a Buddha & two Bodhisattvas, Eastern Wei (534–50 CE), Limestone, overall height 310 cm, Collection of the Qingzhou Museum, Shandong Province, China] Hmmm… a ‘smuggled’ shot from the exhibition? Who’s the naughty one!? Anyway, the museum’s shop sells a nice coffee table book with much better detailed shots of the images in the exhibition, plus historical cum cultural commentary.

Fragments making up an ancient Buddha image.
Made me frown a little,
wondering how (in)completely
I’m picking up the ‘pieces’ of his timeless Dharma.

But still, though he stands still,
his smile is discernible,
still beckoning, as if to say,
‘It’s okay… just do your best! And I’ll still do my best!’*

*In the Mahayana tradition, Buddhas never retire due to their infinite compassion; not even after their parinirvana, thereafter they re-manifest indefinitely as Bodhisattvas to aid beings in need.

Just visited the ‘Serenity in Stone‘ exhibition again today, this round with a guided tour by 3GEMS and with the Pureland Practice Fellowship. It never fails to astound me how unenlightened(?) humans can sculpt such graceful images of the enlightened. Of course, the fully enlightened in their total splendour should be much more magnificent, but many beautiful images already give us pretty amazing inklings of their grace. My theory of how such wonderful images can be made is simple – it is due to the very truth that all of us, sculptors and ‘connoisseurs’ alike, have the same Buddha-nature, the potential to be Buddhas, the innermost nature that is not unlike the Buddhas’. This must be how the creators can shape such majesty, and how the appreciators can rejoice in their works. The moment the artist mindfully sculpts, and the moment the visitor mindfully appreciates the sculpted, are the moments they tune to their Buddha-nature.

(A little of a damper here… I saw the names of supposedly eleven nuns etched faintly onto the backdrop of a set of Buddha-Bodhisattvas images. It looked rather untidy. Maybe there was excess eagerness to leave their names behind to mark their meritorious commission of the work? The good news is that our Buddha-nature can never be marred by even the subtlest of attachment, aversion or delusion. That’s what makes it precious and worth discovering in full!)

Related Article:
For that Ensconced Heart of Yours
http://moonpointer.com/new/2009/01/smile-for-you

Something simple happened a couple of days ago, that upon hindsight, seems more significant than not. I was seated at a coffeeshop eating with a friend. Some distance ahead was a table with three or four schoolgirls. I happened to look in their direction when they stood to leave. To my surprise, I saw a handphone atop a wallet left on the table. As I didn’t know how to address the group and since they were not exactly within earshot, I rushed to pick up the items, before dashing after them. By that time, they were about 30 metres away already, and I had to weave my way through the dinner crowd. When I caught up, I tapped the shoulder of the one closest, and asked, ‘Does this (these) belong to one of you?’ That girl exclaimed, ‘Ya, ya! Oh my God!’ (But what has any imagined deity got to do with this?) Right after passing the items back, I turned and rushed back to eat. Upon return, my friend asked, ‘Did they thank you?’ I replied, ‘I dunno.’ Even if she wanted to, I didn’t give her a chance.

It struck me later that I wasn’t doing  a thankless job, simply because I wasn’t expecting thanks – to the extent that I didn’t even look at the girl’s face for any expression of gratitude, much more to say a word of thanks. I don’t even remember how she looked like. As an interesting symmetry of the suddenness of the event, I don’t think she registered how I looked like either. I was surprised at my spontaneity and its unconditional nature, though it was really just a small favour. But there is still much stuff to improve. For instance, during my rushing through the crowd, I brushed someone lightly on the shoulder, but was too anxious and impatient to get ahead to pause to apologise. It made me think… there must really be countless people (that we don’t register well), whom we need to apologise to due to our unmindfulness, just as there must be countless people (that we also don’t register) that we need to thank.

Related Articles:

Invisible Bodhisattvas & Maras
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/thedailyenlightenment-realisation/message/106
Gratitude to Who?
http://www.moonpointer.com/index1.php?itemid=2493

Maybe the occasional smoker
is already addicted
to the occasional smoking.

Q: If a child makes a mistake out of ignorance or delusion, that he is not aware of as wrong in the first place, the child will suffer from negative karma to a lesser degree, right?

A: Whether driven by ignorance/delusion or not, the intensity of (un)wholesome karma created is determined by the intensity of (un)wholesome intention (or motivation) involved. Usually, children are not motivated by intense evil (greed, hatred, delusion). Thus, there is less negative karma created.

Q: Recently, a mentally ill person was caught burning two men with kerosene. I think this person will suffer from negative karma to a lesser degree, right?

A: It is hard to judge how mentally ill he was if we are not good doctors. However, the process he went through to hurt the men was more complex than what even the severely mentally ill would usually do. There has to intentions to get the fuel, to locate the men, to pour the fuel and to ignite it. It’s rather hard to go through this elaborate process without clear intentions that he kept track of deliberately, perhaps with the clear aim to cause harm, as driven by hate? Then again, we can’t read his mind to judge this case accurately.

I seem to be having a strange problem. But really, this problem has been there all along, only aggravated by the expansion in my jobscope, which made me busier. What is this problem? Because I do Dharma work, I’m particular about not spending work hours dwelling on even the littlest of non-work matters. Since I started my vocation in 1997, I had always been a largely silent worker, making little small talk or private chats with visitors and even colleagues, because, at the back of my mind is always this thought… My work is funded by donors of the ten directions, which is why I have to do my best to share the Dharma with beings of the ten directions (on and offline), and not spend work-time doing non-Dharma stuff instead. As time goes by, colleagues increasingly leave me out of chit-chat. The impression might be that I’m an anti-social loner better left alone? But I’m really just a misunderstood workaholic.

Recently, a colleague attended a Dharma discussion I was presenting at Awareness Place. (Yes, this is part of my work.) At the end of it, she exclaimed surprise that I was ‘so passionate’ in teaching, that it contrasts a lot with my persona in our office where I do research and writing. I think this sums up the irony – Strangers whom I have never met before (at Dharma sessions) know me and my passion more than colleagues whom I meet much more often. I’m more expressively interactive with the first than the latter. Hell, I even crack jokes and guffaw away with the audience. Another Dharma friend also expressed shock at my contrasting personas, saying I usually seem mild-mannered, but become ‘dragon-like’ when sharing the Dharma. (I figure that’s a compliment?)

I used to wonder which is the real me but have since decided that neither are, because there is no one ‘me’ anyway. Still, with strangers, I’m indeed much more comfortable with ‘Dharma talk’ than small talk. But I do see this as a serious problem – because if I’m truly skilful, I should be able to use small talk in any situation to lead up with ease to ‘Dharma talk’. The problem arose from having overly segregated small talk from ‘Dharma talk’. To fare better at Bodhisattva practice, I ought to more diligently connect with others beyond Dharma discussions (on and offline). It’ll be a struggle, I know, due to habitual forces. I remember a secondary school yearbook labelling me ‘a man of few words’. Am I really one? Just look at the number of words in this blog! And wait till you see me sharing Dharma live. :-]