Arizona Bans Karma--Seriously.

Since the dark days of the attacks on America by radical, Islamic terrorists on September 11th 2001, there has been a growing intolerance here for non-Judeo-Christian religions. This has, unfortunately, been mostly aimed at the American-Muslim community in a misguided attempt to combat radical Islam.

Unfortunately, there are numerous people in America who can't seem to make a distinction between an Islamic terrorist and an Islamic moderate practicing their religion freely as allowed under the American Constitution. But I digress. One of the targets of the this fear of anything Islamic has come in the form of a wide-spread paranoia of Sharia law.

In brief, Sharia law is law based on the Islamic holy book, the Qur'an (koran). The Islamophobia is so rampant in America these days that states have taken to banning Sharia law in a preemptive move to prevent such law from taking root. This is occurring despite no movement to impose or establish Sharia law in America. The silliness of it all is that such moves by these states are a waste of time since the American Constitution supersedes any other form of law within America!!

But the politicians of Arizona didn't stop there. They wanted to make sure ALL non-Christian religious beliefs would have no influence in Arizona state law. This included banning karma, which I didn't even know was possible considering karma is basically the idea of, "cause and effect" or causality. So, in one sense, by banning karma, these politicians are essentially trying to ban the scientific law of cause and effect. They seriously banned karma within the state of Arizona, which for a Buddhist is all rather odd considering karma isn't really a form of law to base a government around, but rather a natural consequence of our actions. I'm not angry or offended by their attempt to ban karma but I am certainly amused by it all!! It makes me laugh because banning karma is like banning gravity.

However, what I do take seriously is the generalized intolerance of anything that's not Christian or of Anglo-Saxon cultural origin. The last thing we need in this already complicated world of suffering is additional reasons to divide ourselves and fuel hatred. It truly makes my heart ache to see such narrow-minded thinking in my country, which has often been the example of tolerance in the world.

~Peace to all beings~

An Immodest Proposal ~ Thank Some Non-Veteran for Their Service

My oldest son Douglas is a college senior majoring in biology and environmental sciences. We spent the afternoon working out some of the material infrastructure for his senior research project - which has something to do with the feeding habits of local birds (of which there are, here in our neck of Western NY, a remarkable variety of species - look here and here, for instance). It was fun spending time and witnessing him thinking the project through a bit.

Once Doug headed back to his apartment I came across this post - "Dying for Discovery" - at The New York Times. It recounts the risks and sacrifices that naturalists have made studying things like birds over the years. The author than remarks:

"We go to great lengths commemorating soldiers who have died fighting wars for their countries. Why not do the same for the naturalists who still sometimes give up everything in the effort to understand life?"

He goes on ". . . it also occurs to me that they might prefer to be remembered some other way than on a stone monument, or on paper" and suggests that some of the research done by naturalists (who happened to lose their lives on a research trip) in Amazonia prompted Peru and Bolivia to establish large national Parks to protect wild habitats and species.

I often complain that we disproportionately honor those who have gone off to kill or who have been killed in war. I think this post is important for reminding us that there surely are other domains of endeavor in which individuals risk their lives and who deserve our gratitude and admiration.

I find it obsequious and cloying to hear the radio show hosts and politicians offering a "Thank you for your service" whenever they encounter a veteran or military personnel. What about the social workers and parole officers and teachers and, yes, scientists and artists, who work in underpaid professions for years and decades in order to contribute to a better world? After all, they could be out there peddling sub-prime mortgages (or some other form of snake oil) and making real money. When was the last time you heard someone - anyone - publicly thank those folks for their service? No, instead we are taking aim at them (the teachers and parole officers are, after all members of those dastardly public sector unions) in the misguided quest for fiscal responsibility.

Strong Evidence Against the Theory of Evolution

This graphic shows trends in public beliefs among Americans re: evolution. You can find the most recent Gallop Poll here. But the dreary results suggest that just shy of 80% of Americans believe God has played at least some role in the evolutionary process.

_________

Update: Why evidence against the theory of evolution? One would presume that holding ludicrous beliefs runs counter to any plausible understanding of "fitness." And apparently that is no barrier to pro-creation among Americans.

Scientific Images: Prize-Winning Snow Flakes

And the 2010 Lennart Nilsson Award (Recognizing Extraordinary Image Makers in Science) goes to CalTach Physicist Kenneth Libbrecht. He makes pictures of snowflakes. I figured it would be difficult to make any connection between his photographs and politics; then I saw the stamps. Not only are they official postage, but they have the standard distributive politics and familiar foreign policy implications at work - one flake each from Alaska and Michigan with the other two being Canadian. Can you identify which ones?

And, of course, the Europeans had to get on on the act .... These are Austrian stamps:

Having the Kalama Sutra as a Foundation.

My last post mentioned the Kalama Sutra and a discussion in the comment section had me analyzing this fundamental sutra further. Doug commented how the Kalama Sutra hit him like a bolt and is aiding him in gaining a deeper, and wider awareness of the Dharma.

I have mentioned here before that I have been (and still am) deeply influenced by science. I don't agree with some Buddhists who say the Dharma and science have nothing in common, or shouldn't in fact interact. I think the Kalama Sutra teaches otherwise. That is because it is an early form of the scientific method. It's similar in my mind to a, "scientific control" which allows one to access a particular process (Dharma practice) without too much bias from other influences. In Buddhist practice we're talking about such biases as our ego, an overly controlling teacher or peer pressure.

The Kalama Sutra gives us a framework to judge teachings by to see if they work. Including all the other sutras. In my opinion, it is the jumping off point for continued analysis of the other sutras. Others encourage starting from the Heart Sutra or the Diamond Sutra. I adore the Heart Sutra, and the others but I find that understanding the Kalama Sutra first to be a great help in understanding the others. But I digress. Do the teachings help me and the people around me suffer less? Do they help bring happiness and peace into life? The Buddha is advising us to test his teachings and those of all teachers that come after him because otherwise we are simply parroting someone else. It doesn't end suffering to simply be able to parrot someone else and recite all the teachings ever written or committed to memory. That's simple obedience and memorization. That takes you nowhere but back into the arms of the ego.

We have to experience it for ourselves. We have to let our minds marinate in their essence and observe how they affect our daily lives and interactions. If the teachings help us be nicer, happier and much more peaceful people; and if they help us suffer less than we know that what has been taught to us is beneficial and worth continuing to learn from. If, however, a teacher makes us feel worse about ourselves or contradicts our direct experience on the matter then you can know that the teacher is leading you astray.

The Buddha didn't want people to follow him or worship him but rather he wanted his fellow siblings (us) to experience the peace and relief from suffering that he experienced. Thus, because of this humble sharing of a sincere person he shows us that he is not Buddha because of some desire for self-aggrandizement or other stroking of the ego. Encouraging people to test his teachings and those who claim to follow in his tradition is the exact opposite of the blind obedience that some religious traditions engender. Where others want to tell you what to think, (and what to ignore) Buddha invites us to follow his map and see for ourselves if it leads anywhere beneficial. It's in our own hands and any teacher who won't encourage or allow for direct experience in their teachings is not one who would seem to fully understand the Buddha's invitation.

~Peace to all beings~

Adapting to Rising Heat.

This post started as a comment in regards to Genkaku's post about the current heat wave on the East coast of America. Thanks Genkaku for the inspiration:

The Earth is our only home but for too long humans have forgotten our close interdependent relationship with her, which has led us to neglect the relationship and abuse her. Yet as we know well from studying the Dharma, we can not hurt the environment without hurting ourselves. We can ignore science all we want but the reality is that it's been getting warmer and warmer at a faster pace than prior warming periods. Direct observations have linked it to fossil fuel use. Seeing how corrosive factory and car pollution is to the human body I will trust science when they conclude that it's changing our climate adversely. Schooling has a funny way of doing that. Science has been right in countless ways because it is based on direct observations and experiments, which incidentally is not entirely unlike the Dharma's teachings of awareness and mindfulness.

This isn't a political issue because we all physically and emotionally suffer when our environment is degraded but besides that it affects the only home we are lucky to enjoy. Regardless of how we got to this point of a warming climate, I think our society needs to adapt to nature better and follow the rest of the world that take siestas (afternoon naps) during the hottest parts of the day. Let nature do it's thing and not fight it. We should take the opportunity to rest and take a nap. What a novel idea!! When I lived in West Africa the whole place would nearly completely shut down between the hours of noon and 2pm. It's only two hours but many Americans would see that as lost productivity, and that unwillingness to accept limitations causes a lot of suffering. Both physically and mentally. It's not being lazy as the American, Puritan work ethic would suggest. It's being aware of our limitations and being fully accepting of the present moment.

I think we push the human body in our modern society too much. We have delusions about what the human body can take and how far we can push it but the human body is perfectly aware of the moment and it's capacities. Whether we accept those limitations or not the body will shut down when the present moment finds it unable to function. Our mind might ignore the present moment but our bodies are finely tuned to it.

Perhaps we can learn from that and accept our limitations instead of forcing and pushing everything. In today's western world (I can't speak for elsewhere) we're over-worked, get less sleep and eat bad food in an impossible chase to "save time" and stay one step ahead in this fast paced world. And I can't help but wonder if that's partly why there's been such an increase in anger, hatred and selfishness. So I say we slow down a bit and bring about noon siesta time here to America.

PHOTO CREDIT: Napping monk by Brian Keathley on Flickr.

Is our Universe inside a Wormhole?

A long time ago, in a universe much larger than our own, a giant star collapsed. Its implosion crammed so much mass and energy together that it created a wormhole to another universe. And inside this wormhole, our own universe was born. It may seem fantastic, but a theoretical physicist claims that such a scenario could help answer some of the most perplexing questions in cosmology.

A number of facets about our universe don't make sense. One is gravity. Scientists can't construct a mathematical formula that unites gravity with the three other basic forces of nature: the strong and weak nuclear forces and electromagnetism. Another problem is dark energy, the mysterious phenomenon that seems to be expanding our universe at an accelerating rate, even though gravity should be contracting it or at least slowing the expansion.

These conundrums may be a result of stopping the search for the riddle of the cosmos at the big bang, says Nikodem Poplawski of Indiana University in Bloomington. The big bang theory holds that our universe began as a single point—or singularity—about 13.7 billion years ago that has been expanding outward ever since. Perhaps, Poplawski argues, we need to consider that something existed before the big bang that gave rise to it. Such a scenario could address the quandaries about gravity and the expanding universe. If another universe existed before our own, gravity could be traced back to a point where it did unite with the nuclear forces and electromagnetism. And if our universe is now expanding toward the other end of the wormhole, this movement—rather than the elusive dark energy—could account for our expanding universe.

James: This reopens the door I feel to the "Cyclic Model" of the Universe, which basically states that our Universe (just like everything else) is impermanent and will be reborn again and again through a series of expansions and collapses.

The other implication I considered in regards to this theory is that perhaps rebirth of our karmic energy could occur through smaller, similar wormholes or channels toward a new incarnation. "Lorentzian traversable wormholes [not yet fully proven] would allow travel from one part of the universe to another part of that same universe very quickly or would allow travel from one universe to another."

And that new form could be in a whole other world at the opposite end of the Universe, which would explain why the population on Earth is growing. Because if other life isn't possible somewhere else in our Universe or within a parallel one then how do you explain the growing population on Earth? Some of the expansion of human lives could also involve the billions of insects.

Obviously this is mostly conjecture on my part and some of it has still yet to be proven. It really doesn't have too much to do with living in the present moment but being an intellectual I can't resist but see how science might marry up with Buddhist cosmology and thought. In doing research for this post I came across a very concrete and scientific explanation of rebirth by Bhikkhu Pesala:

Light a candle with a match, or visualise doing it. Hold the wick directly above the lighted match, but not actually touching the flame. Watch carefully. The wick will begin to smoke, and will then burst into flame. Does the flame jump from the match to the candle? Is the candle flame the same as the flame on the match, or is it a different one? If we describe the process scientifically we will say that the heat from the flame on the match vaporised some paraffin wax from the candle, and the paraffin vapour ignited, producing a new flame. The two flames are separate and burn from different fuels, but are causally related.

Likewise, kamma done in one existence is like the heat. The candle is like the physical basis provided by the parents. The candle flame is like the newly born being that arises dependent upon previous causes and present supporting conditions. One important difference between rebirth and the two flames is that the last conscious moment of the previous existence ceases totally, then rebirth consciousness arises immediately afterwards. No mental or physical phenomena “transmigrate” or pass between the two existences. Rebirth is simple a process of cause and effect.

James: The compact potential energy within the match is like the energy of our consciousness and when the flame from the match dies out the transfer is complete and the match is tossed as our worthless carcass would be. The flame that was the match and the flame in the new form (body/being/form) of the candle are neither different from each other nor the same.

~Peace to all beings~

The Zen of Pain.

I have from time to time heard of monks who can meditate in the freezing cold and maintain a warm body temperature, and those who have a high threshold for pain. Well, it seems that science has proven that meditation helps reduce pain.

AFP, March 3, 2010

Montreal, Canada -- ZEN meditation helps lower sensitivity to pain by thickening a part of the brain that regulates emotion and painful sensations, according to a study published recently. University of Montreal researchers compared the grey matter thickness of 17 Zen meditators and 18 non-meditators and found evidence that practising the centuries-old discipline can reinforce a central part of the brain called the anterior cingulate. "Through training, Zen meditators appear to thicken certain areas of their cortex and this appears to underlie their lower sensitivity to pain," lead author Joshua Grant said in a statement.

Building on an earlier study, the researchers measured thermal pain sensitivity by applying a heated plate to the calf of participants. This was followed by scanning the brains of subjects with structural magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). The MRI results showed central brain regions that regulate emotion and pain were significantly thicker in meditators compared to non-meditators.

James: This isn't news to Buddhism because reports of over-coming pain have been known in Buddhist history for centuries. It is interesting though to see science proving it. It makes sense though that meditation, which regulates the mind would help reduce pain. There is clearly a connection between the mind and body, so it isn't any wonder that Buddhists teach that oneness of body and mind through meditation and mindfulness opens the way for a calmer state of being. This is proving that through meditation one can literally rewire the brain, which surely has something to do with realizing long-term enlightenment.

I have noticed actually a higher pain threshold since beginning my Buddhist practice. I blew it off at first as being pseudo-science experiences but this makes me rethink that position. When I get tattoos I can sit through the pain to where at times it actually feels good!! I think that's in part because I meditate while getting the tattoo. The first few tattoos that I got where quite painful and ironically enough that was a time before I was practicing Buddhist meditation.

This also makes me think of the pain experienced from doing sitting meditation when first starting out or when returning to a dormant practice. Because the more you practice, the less painful it seems to get:

"The often painful posture associated with Zen meditation may lead to thicker cortex and lower pain sensitivity," Grant opined. Several of the meditators tolerated a maximum 53°C produced by a heating plate. They appeared to further reduce their pain partly through slower breathing: 12 breaths per minute versus an average of 15 breaths for non-meditators. "Slower breathing certainly coincided with reduced pain and may influence pain by keeping the body in a relaxed state," Grant said in the earlier study. Ultimately, Zen meditators experience an 18% reduction in pain sensitivity, according to the original study.

James: If everything is interdependent and interconnected then clearly it makes sense that the body can be tempered by the mind when its steered in the right direction. The mind in my opinion isn't entirely useless or bad as some Buddhists might believe. I see it as a wild horse that if tamed, it can accomplish some amazing things. After all, if we shut off the mind completely then we'd be piles of mush unable to be moved to practice compassion, loving-kindness and good will.

ADDENDUM: The blog just surpassed the 400,000 mark of visits--Thanks to everyone for all your visits, comments and conservations. Let's keep it going!! Bowing...

~Peace to all beings~

Science, the Brain and Meditation.

One of the subjects that interest me most is the intersection of science and Buddhism as I highly value both. So, it is always enlightening and exciting to see where they meet and compliment each other. I have posted several articles showing the effects of mediation on the brain but this one triggered a fresh perspective to the subject--That being the interactions between the left and right hemispheres of the brain:

Enlightenment has been described in many ways, but what is common to most descriptions of enlightenment is a change in the sense of ‘self,’ and a sensation of a release from suffering. An enlightened person is said to no longer identify with herself as the individual she once was. She is also said to no longer experience negative thoughts.

Our feeling part of our Self is located in the limbic system, in this case the amygdala. In most people, the left side feels pleasure or positive emotions, and the right side experiences negative emotions. In each case, the right (positive) and left (negative) components are synaptically ‘wired’ to each other. Thoughts and emotions are communicated back and forth between both sides of the the brain along the synapses. Now here is where meditation impacts these processes. Most meditative practices involve techniques to de-emphasize, defuse or reduce negative thoughts. Over the long term, what this means in the brain is that the transmission of electrical impulses into both the right side (negative) of both the amygdala and hippocampus is reduced. Fewer negative feelings and thoughts, less activity along those pathways.

Published studies support the idea that long term meditation works by ‘starving’ the brain of negative emotions and expectations. So meditation not only trains us not to respond as intensely and frequently to negative thoughts and emotions, it also causes an ‘atrophying’ of our brain’s ability to process those thoughts and emotions. But the caveat here, is that it takes a lot of consistent practice over the long term.

James: This has probably occurred to others but the explanation of the right brain, left brain interaction has really given me new insight into why duality is such a strong aspect to the human reality. And it's pretty impressive that science can now prove that meditation can literally rewire the brain to unlock a less volatile brain and thus mind.No wonder people are said to be "transformed" and a "new person altogether" or "reborn" when they realize enlightenment. They have finally mastered their brain and trained it with meditation and mindfulness to no longer express the dualistic nature of the mind. Buddhism and science are always amazing me with how much we still have to learn but also experience. Thus, the practice.

~Peace to all beings~

Biocentrism.

I have recently come across an interesting science theory call Biocentrism as proposed by scientist Robert Lanza. I was fascinated with the many connections between it and much Buddhist philosophy. I will give you a quick run-down of what Biocentrism is about via wikipedia, which isn't the best source but it's the easiest for my purposes but I encourage you to read about it further. Biocentrism posits that life created the universe and not the other way around as traditional science has taught us. This blends nicely into the Buddhist concept that reality is what our limited and deluded mind makes of it. The seven principles of Biocentrism are as follows. Note the similarities between it and Buddhist thought:

1). What we perceive as reality is a process that involves our consciousness. An "external" reality, if it existed, would by definition have to exist in space. But this is meaningless, because space and time are not absolute realities but rather tools of the human and animal mind.

2). Our external and internal perceptions are inextricably intertwined. They are different sides of the same coin and cannot be divorced from one another.

3). The behavior of subatomic particles, indeed all particles and objects, is inextricably linked to the presence of an observer. Without the presence of a conscious observer, they at best exist in an undetermined state of probability waves.

4). Without consciousness, "matter" dwells in an undetermined state of probability. Any universe that could have preceded consciousness only existed in a probability state.

5). The structure of the universe is explainable only through biocentrism. The universe is fine-tuned for life, which makes perfect sense as life creates the universe, not the other way around. The "universe" is simply the complete spatio-temporal logic of the self.

6). Time does not have a real existence outside of animal-sense perception. It is the process by which we perceive changes in the universe.

7). Space, like time, is not an object or a thing. Space is another form of our animal understanding and does not have an independent reality. We carry space and time around with us like turtles with shells. Thus, there is no absolute self-existing matrix in which physical events occur independent of life.

James: Then there is this following excerpt from a different article about how scientist Robert Lanza rediscovered this idea that Buddhists have believed for eons. It is a nice image of what is being talked about with this theory and startlingly reminds me of Indra's Net metaphor:

The farther we peer into space, the more we realize that the nature of the universe cannot be understood fully by inspecting spiral galaxies or watching distant supernovas. It lies deeper. It involves our very selves. This insight snapped into focus one day while one of us (Lanza) was walking through the woods. Looking up, he saw a huge golden orb web spider tethered to the overhead boughs. There the creature sat on a single thread, reaching out across its web to detect the vibrations of a trapped insect struggling to escape. The spider surveyed its universe, but everything beyond that gossamer pinwheel was incomprehensible. The human observer seemed as far-off to the spider as telescopic objects seem to us. Yet there was something kindred: We humans, too, lie at the heart of a great web of space and time whose threads are connected according to laws that dwell in our minds.

James: As Nobel physicist John Wheeler once said, “No phenomenon is a real phenomenon until it is an observed phenomenon.” I look forward to reading more about this theory as I am very fascinated with interactions between science and Buddhism. If everyone and everything is interdependent and interconnected then I see no reason why Buddhism and science have to be mutually exclusive. It seems to me that many of the theories posited by both are quite similar.

PHOTO CREDIT: University of Chicago Press

~Peace to all beings~

Faith in Buddhism.

Perhaps because of our Judeo-Christian background, we have a tendency to regard doubt as something shameful, almost as an enemy. We feel that if we have doubts, it means that we are denying the teachings and that we should really have unquestioning faith. Now in certain religions, unquestioning faith is considered a desirable quality. But in the Buddha-dharma, this is not necessarily so. Referring to the dharma, the Buddha said, “ehi passiko,” which means “come and see,” or “come and investigate,” not “come and believe.”

An open, questioning mind is not regarded as a drawback to followers of the Buddha-dharma. However, a mind that says, “This is not part of my mental framework, therefore I don't believe it,” is a closed mind, and such an attitude is a great disadvantage for those who aspire to follow any spiritual path. But an open mind, which questions and doesn't accept things simply because they are said, is no problem at all.

–Ani Tenzin Palmo, from “Necessary Doubt,” Tricycle, Summer 2002. Special thanks to Philip Ryan at Tricycle for this quote.

James: This reminds me of the quote, "Minds are like parachutes. They only work when they're open." One of the reasons that I began to sour on Christianity was because of the insistence upon "blind faith." I never understood how using my mind to question the claims being made by adult leaders in my former church was giving into "Satan" when "God" was the one who gave me that brain, which is able to question in the first place!! I like the translation of "come and see" because it is an invitation to spirituality but coupled with an invitation to see for yourself. I was very impressed with that approach when I first began investigating Buddhism. It is a very science based approach to spirituality, which appealed greatly to me as one who was raised on the scientific method.

Seeing is believing as we say in the west and in many ways Buddha was an ancient scientist of the mind and perhaps the first psychiatrist. The teaching of cause and effect is very much a foundation of scientific inquiry. He was certainly compared to a doctor prescribing countless variations of the Dharma (medications) to each person based on their individual karmic needs. That said, let's get back to the psychiatrist analogy in specific. A psychiatrist knows that trust is vital to enabling the patient in believing that the specific treatment plan prescribed will be helpful to the patient. That means allowing the patient to ask questions about the process. That's because a psychiatrist/psychologist knows that if a person feels like they are doing something out of guilt, fear or blind faith it doesn't matter how helpful the therapy might be, the patient is simply not going to buy into the program.

Buddhism is a lot like psychological therapy program put forth by Buddha. He knew that being able to question his teachings was the only way people would fully consider what he taught without feeling forced into it and force is completely antithetical to the Dharma he revealed. Buddha was a great questioner as he dared question the great Brahmin priest class of his day, which was very rebellious. He took the power of religion out of the hands of the privileged few and gave it back to the masses. He was a Robin-hood of spirituality in a way. That great tradition of questioning phenomenon and experiences for oneself is to me what makes Buddhism such a respected tradition. It treats people like adults rather than children to be told what to think, believe and how to act.

He was not very interested in speculation and open-ended faith but rather faith, which is merely a step in-between ignorance and knowing for oneself. It is a pit-stop of sorts along the journey of experiential wisdom. The Great Awakened one said in the Kasibharadvaja Sutta of the Samyutta Nikaya that "Faith is the seed and practice is the rain" which is nothing near blind faith. He goes on further saying, "And wisdom is my yoke and my plough." Thus, without the wisdom (the plough) to prepare the fertile field (the mind) with experience the seed of faith will wither, dry up, die and be of no use. Faith in Buddhism is in large part more of a conviction to accomplish ones goals for oneself, rather than being a submission and obedience to others as is often the case with the monotheistic religions.

~Peace to all beings~

Of Gods, Bodhisattvas and Shrines.

This post was taken from a comment about a discussion of Richard Dawkin's excellent book, "The God Delusion" and the concept of a Creator God on Buddha Space. I've written about this before but have some new insights. Ah the many facets of the diamond that is the Buddhadharma:

My "Creator God" is science. However, I do not worship at the altar of science as some atheists and others do. Attaching too much to it. I see it as an impersonal force that holds everything together. The cosmic glue. I do not believe that one needs to believe in a God to be a good person. I am my own savior or my own destructive downfall.

However, I also believe that the existence or nonexistence of any deities is unknown but not necessarily unknowable. It's hard to shut the door on anything completely in this unpredictable universe. A scientist must also leave room for unforeseen information. For me personally I'm 99.99999% certain that there is no Creator God. Yet most of the time it doesn't really have much impact on my practice one way of the other--the idea of Creator God that is. I just don't see the need for a Creator God in my life or in existence overall.

The same goes for the gods and Bodhisattvas in Buddhism. I do not believe in the literal reality of these beings. I see them more as archetypes of what I want to become and need to avoid. So I believe in them in so far as I believe that I have their same potential with me. So I keep some Bodhisattva statues around the house like Avalokiteshvara/Kwan Yin because in part, I am a visual learner. I like having a visual representations as reminders to live more compassionately, etc. It's kind of like having a note up on the door to remind you each day to "Smile more" or a post-it note on the bathroom mirror to "be nicer."

The difference being the Bodhisattva "notes" are beautiful works of art to admire and find peace in. There is something in the way these Buddha and Bodhisattvas statues' faces are carved that always bring me a feeling of serenity and as an artist I really find something valuable in that. I forget easily and having that physical, visual reminder helps a lot. I'm not attached, however, to these statues and what they do for me. I am able to remember to be what I want to be without them as well. They simply add a flair to my practice, which I admit I have a bit of a weakness for at times. I do like a touch of artistic expression in my practice.

I certainly do not believe though that one must have these statues in their houses to be motivated and encouraged to be nicer, more compassionate, etc. And for those that firmly believe in the literal reality of bodhisattvas, gods, demons and believe in praying to them I say keep on doing what works best for you in your life. It it helps you reduce suffering in your personal life and within your relationships then that's about all that matters. There are many shades of light shining through the diamond of the Dharma; purple, red, green and blue but all is light. Plus the statues are beautiful art to have around the house. I believe that all that which encourages the Dharma is to be encouraged and shared with those who wish to hear of it. I do not believe in forcing others into hearing about Buddhism or coercing people into it. That only causes more suffering.

As for shrines I see them as places where a person can visit and find great strength and empowerment. As well as being a place where one can interactively and very physically make a connection with all humanity. There is a sense of connection when visiting places that many people consider special and places of refuge. It is a site that is a physical representation of all the aspirations and dedications of countless fellow aspirants practicing for the same ideals. That can be a powerful experience affirming the stabilizing presence of oneness. Offerings at shrines, altars and temples are for me symbolic acts of affirming my willingness to sacrifice my desires for realization of ultimate liberation from suffering. That said, I do not believe that offering a few coins at the alter will ensure a god intercedes on my behalf but if it helps you be a more centered person then all the best to you. Gassho.

~Peace to all beings~

Earth: The Pale Blue Dot.

Concerning what Buddhism thinks toward the universe the Buddha has said, “It is so large that it has no exterior, and so small that it has no interior.” “It means that at the Tathagata level, in terms of largeness, you can’t see the edge of the universe, and in terms of smallness, you can’t see the smallest microscopic particle of matter."

James: Whenever this perspective comes into focus it always humbles and reassures me that the bigger picture of reality is unfolding as it should. How could it not be unfolding at it should for we don't have much control over anything let alone our fate in the unfathomable totally of the Universe. We have learned a lot as a species but we still probably don't even know a tenth of what the Universe is about and we will most likely never know. Perhaps that's the way it is meant to be because how can something so immense and ever changing ever be pinned down and completely understand by a mind, which we know is flawed to begin with? Catching up to the consciousness of this vast experiment is in my view a glimpse into the state of parinirvana, which in totality is impossible to grasp until, (it seems to this humbled mind) until one no longer longs to grasp at all. Perhaps we'll "know" it when our desire to know is exhausted.

How lucky to have been born on this pale blue dot of dust hurtling through the vast expanse of a living Universe at all? How even luckier is it then to have been born as a human with the ability to understand that we're living on a pale, isolated blue dot of dust hurtling through the vast expanse of a living, breathing Universe!! And that on this pale blue dot once walked a man called Buddha who changed this dot forever. Whole civilizations of ants live and die generation after generation with no knowledge whatsoever that they live on such a miracle of a rock floating and spinning around a bright, giant, star of nuclear reactivity.

We can try to act like we are in control with our super smart, fast computers but in the totality of it all those are just blimps on a inconceivably massive time line. We're along for the ride so while pursuing science and looking beyond our current limitations is something we should always pursue we need to remember the less flashy parts of the puzzle. Black holes, red dwarfs, spiral galaxies and massive, multi-colored planets are enthralling and awe inspiring to be sure but so is the most delicate, humblest blade of grass that we often pass as we rush our way across this pale blue dot. Some of the most amazing moments in existence don't take place in a lab, aren't seen through the lens of a telescope or measured with the most high-tech satellite. As my master Thich Nhat Hanh says:

“I like to walk alone on country paths, rice plants and wild grasses on both sides, putting each foot down on the earth in mindfulness, knowing that I walk on the wondrous earth. In such moments, existence is a miraculous and mysterious reality. People usually consider walking on water or in thin air a miracle. But I think the real miracle is not to walk either on water or in thin air, but to walk on earth. Every day we are engaged in a miracle which we don’t even recognize: a blue sky, white clouds, green leaves, the black, curious eyes of a child--our own two eyes. All is a miracle...

James: I am content to just be apart of it all and to share a few spins around the sun with you all on this miracle rock called, Earth. That makes me smile.

~Peace to all beings~

The Beauty in Science.

I especially like the quote at the end by the fabulous Neil deGrasse Tyson. As well as his quote about the iron in the giant meteor he mentions being the same iron in our blood. Interconnection is so damn cool!!!

That's in part (and the Sam. Harris quote about meditating in a cave like a mystic [or Buddhist I would add] but not making unjustifiable claims about those experiences) why I like the combination of Buddhism and science. Interconnection makes me feel so at peace and in harmony with all that is.

But back to the Sam Harris quote about being able to meditate but not making unjustifiable claims. Buddhist masters warn students that along the way they will experience all kinds of interesting phenomena in their brains upon deep meditation. However, those experiences are still ego trying to make special claims and declarations that these empty phenomena are something other than distractions. They are in fact (most meditation masters will tell you) false horizons/false feelings of realizing enlightenment. So like a diamond we shine forward and cut through all of these delusions.

You know, when I first started meditating and first go into Buddhism I use to think delusions were mainly ones that made you feel like you were worthless. However, the longer I practice the more I realize that often the hardest delusions to overcome and the ones that cause the most damage and cause the most setbacks to my path are delusions of grandeur.

~Peace to all beings~

Where Science and Buddhism Meet.

Where Science and Buddhism Meet from Gerald Penilla on Vimeo.

~Peace to all beings~

Zen Meditation Alleviates Pain.

ScienceDaily (Feb. 6, 2009) — Zen meditation – a centuries-old practice that can provide mental, physical and emotional balance – may reduce pain according to Université de Montréal researchers. A new study in the January edition of Psychosomatic Medicine reports that Zen meditators have lower pain sensitivity both in and out of a meditative state compared to non-meditators.

Joshua A. Grant, a doctoral student in the Department of Physiology, co-authored the paper with Pierre Rainville, a professor and researcher at the Université de Montréal and it's affiliated Institut universitaire de gériatrie de Montréal. The main goal of their study was to examine whether trained meditators perceived pain differently than non-meditators.

"While previous studies have shown that teaching chronic pain patients to meditate is beneficial, very few studies have looked at pain processing in healthy, highly trained meditators. This study was a first step in determining how or why meditation might influence pain perception." says Grant.

For this study, the scientists recruited 13 Zen meditators with a minimum of 1,000 hours of practice to undergo a pain test and contrasted their reaction with 13 non-meditators. Subjects included 10 women and 16 men between the ages of 22 to 56.

The administered pain test was simple: A thermal heat source, a computer controlled heating plate, was pressed against the calves of subjects intermittently at varying temperatures. Heat levels began at 43 degrees Celsius and went to a maximum of 53 degrees Celsius depending on each participant's sensitivity. While quite a few of the meditators tolerated the maximum temperature, all control subjects were well below 53 degrees Celsius.

Grant and Rainville noticed a marked difference in how their two test groups reacted to pain testing – Zen meditators had much lower pain sensitivity (even without meditating) compared to non-meditators. During the meditation-like conditions it appeared meditators further reduced their pain partly through slower breathing: 12 breaths per minute versus an average of 15 breaths for non-meditators.

"Slower breathing certainly coincided with reduced pain and may influence pain by keeping the body in a relaxed state." says Grant. "While previous studies have found that the emotional aspects of pain are influenced by meditation, we found that the sensation itself, as well as the emotional response, is different in meditators."

The ultimate result? Zen meditators experienced an 18 percent reduction in pain intensity. "If meditation can change the way someone feels pain, thereby reducing the amount of pain medication required for an ailment, that would be clearly beneficial," says Grant.

James: I'm not too surprised. It's always cool to see science agree with Buddhism because I believe that science and religion have more in common and complement each other more than people might realize. I'm sure that the results would be the same or similar with other forms of meditation--not just Zen meditation. Maybe this is why I have a high pain threshold? When I get tattoos I am able to deal with the pain quite well through the breathing techniques that I have learned via Buddhism.

This reminds of what "Anonymous" said in the last post about one of his teachers going without anesthetic for a minor surgery using the breathing techniques of meditation instead, which is a great example of how to use breathing techniques to alleviate pain. However, not everyone can do this even if they are an experienced meditator so I don't think someone is less of a Buddhist if they choose a general anesthetic. Of course there is a limit to that ability such as if someone needs open heart surgery but if it can help reduce aches and pains as well as even some minor outpatient surgeries then all the better.

That said, sometimes pain medication is necessary and I don't see it as violating the precepts when it is needed as prescribed by a doctor. Of course taking pain medication when not needed becomes the source of pain rather than alleviating it because it creates addiction and eventually can lead to loss of hearing (amongst other suffering) as seen in the American conservative radio talk show host, Rush Limbaugh.

Science and Buddhism can complement each other in many areas if we are willing to look for them and embrace the idea that both play integral roles in our lives. I personally would feel completely lost without Buddhism and meditation. In addition, without science I probably wouldn't be alive today to be able to learn what I have through Buddhism and thus make more progress along the middle-path in this precious human life. Buddhism is teaching science that many spiritual techniques and activities are beneficial and not just some made up nonsense.

Of course there are going to be differences to both schools of thought but if we can focus on what we have in common then I think both sides can reduce the ill-will toward the other, which is a good thing in my view. The less ill-will in this world the better.

PHOTO: Zazen hands. Elheiji (Eiheiji) Zen Monastery, Japan.

Mental Illness: Meditation or Medication? Often, Both.

This is a long post but an important one because it touches on an issue--mental illnes, which some in spiritual circles choose to ignore. As many of you know I have been living with schizoaffective disorder for most of my life and have found great refuge, relief of symptoms and calm from Buddhism and meditation in particular. Of course, we all are "mentally ill" or else we wouldn't be here in samsara but some have severe, biological mental illnesses and require a hybrid approach of therapies and practices.

I notice that the more I meditate the easier it is to deal with my condition. Yet meditation alone isn't enough in my situation because despite meditating I still am debilitated by disabling symptoms such as paranoia, hallucinations, delusions (psychiatric delusions such as being convinced that you are the most horrible person on Earth), mood swings and chronic depression.

Thus I have found medications help fill the void and basically keep me alive because my depressive episodes easily lead to suicidal thoughts. I have found an excellent psychiatrist who has found a great balance of medications to keep myself as stable as can be expected outside finding a cure to the disease. In addition I talk regularly with a psychotherapist to help me keep track of my mood swings and give me tips on how to better manage my illness through establishing routines and developing other techniques. So I was excited when I read an excellent article in the current Buddhadharma magazine that arrived in my mailbox today about this very subject:

When Buddhism first came to the West, many teachers and practitioners initially dismissed psychotherapy as superficial, unnecessary and possibly counterproductive. As time went on...psychotherapy's relationship to spiritual practice started to undergo a reevaluation, and the two disciplines began to intermingle a bit more. In fact, many therapists and meditation teachers now agree that meditation and psychotherapy can be mutually facilitating. Meditators seem to progress more quickly in theraphy, while psychotherapy can improve the effectiveness of their meditation.

James: I am one of those meditators who have progressed more quickly in therapy thanks in part to my meditation practice. In fact, when I come into therapy and am having a difficult time with my mental illness she always asks if I'm meditating and the answer is often, "no." So in a lot of ways my meditation practice is a type of medication though I still do have episodes despite meditating. When I meditate on a regular basis it takes some of the severity out of my symptoms. That said, while meditation is very effective it isn't the entire solution and I think we Buddhists must admit that meditation isn't the solution to everthing--especially when medical issues are involved. It is true that meditation has been shown to reduce blood pressure, induce relaxation and other health benefits but it can not solve severe, biological mental illness symptoms in total.

Combining meditation and psychotherapy makes sense if we appreciate how they work in complementary ways. For the most part, meditation focuses primarily on developing capacities such as concentration and awareness, whereas psyschotherpay focuses primarily on changing the objects of awareness, such as emotions and beliefs. Of course there are significant overlaps, but this complimentarity suggests why combining both approaches can be very helpful. Meditative qualities can facilitate psychotherapeutic healing of painful patterns, while the psychotherapeutic healing of these painful patterns can reduce the disruption of spiritual practice.

James: Medication has toned down the volume of distracting stimuli in my head such as the hallucinations and calmed my nerves to enable me the opportunity to actually be able to practice. Before medications I wouldn't have had the patience to meditate due to manic episodes that kept my thoughts racing too fast to have the concentration needed to sit even for a few minutes. It's like trying to do meditation effectively after drinking four pots of coffee in an hour. Either that or I'd be so depressed that I couldn't get out of bed let alone have the motivation and intention to meditate.

So the medication has lowered the volume and reduced the static in my brain to put me in a position where meditation is actually even an option and be able to not just do it but find great benefit from it. I was drowning without medication and the water was up to my mouth and nose so the medications have drained the water down to my chest level. So while it's difficult to walk through chest deep water at least I can now (for the most part) breath comfortably, which gives me the freedom to meditate and have the ability to make progress upon the path that otherwise would be basically impossible. When it comes to using medication in combination with a Buddhist practice there are basically too camps according to the author of this article. First, the purists and second the pragmatists (I fall into pragmatist category):

Spiritual purists argue that if mental suffering is fundamentally spiritual and karmic, spiritual practice alone is appropriate to treat it. Moreover they are concerned that medication may dull or derail spiritual practice. They also worry that medications may reduce or distort awareness, and thereby make practice more difficult. In this view, medications can be novel forms of the "mind clouding intoxicants" prohibited by the lay precepts to which many Buddhists practitioners adhere. Therefore, taking these modern pharmacological agents is tantamount to violating this precept.

James: Let me say that I have found personally (and I've read that this is the case for many others) that my medications do the opposite of "dull or derail spiritual practice," "reduce or distort awarness." Without them I was so depressed, mislead by hallucinations (voices) and detached by dissociation that I was a nihilist believing in nothing and wanting the world to explode to end everyone's misery. At least that's what I thought at the time in my deluded mind.

It wasn't until I started to lower the static in my head through medications that I saw the benefits of spirituality and sought out Buddhism. Before then my mind was clogged and preoccupied with constant mental torment and anguish. It simply didn't have the stability at the time for a spiritual practice. Thus is was before medications that I had a dulled spiritual practice--not after. The medications increased my awareness of reality rather than dull it as they helped sharpen my concentration, focus and attention (I have Attention Deficit Disorder as well) to enable me to actually have a chance at understanding concepts like mindfulness. I know for certain that I'd be spiritual lost still without the addition of medication to give me a somewhat stable mind to build a spiritual foundation upon.

By contrast, pragmatists hold that spiritual practice alone is simply insufficient, or at least not optimal, for healing all mental suffering. While not denying the validity of some purist concerns, pragmatists argue that certain problems and pathologies respond best to other therapies, and one of those therapies can be medication.

James: Buddhism can indeed be more than enough for the regular depression and anxiety that occur with living in samsara. However, those diagnosed with a severe biological mental illness that involves chemical imbalances within the brain need the additional help that comes with proper medication and therapeutic monitoring. It can be very dangerous and irresponsible to prevent someone with severe deperssion from seeking psychiatric help because suicide is a very real threat and should never, EVER be ignored or blown off.

People with a severe mental illness who do not seek medication are usually playing with a loaded gun that could very easily go off in the form of suicide. Some people can get by with herbal supplements and vitamins but most people with severe mental troubles need stronger medicine. I tried the "natural route" and it didn't even cut the symptoms much at all.

The author who is a professor of psychiatry (and a Buddhist) did a study with Buddhist practitioners with suffer from mental illness: Our team of researchers, all physicians and long-term meditators, investigated a group of nineteen Buddhist practioneers (thirteen women and six men) diagnosed with major depression. These practioneers had all been doing meditation, mainly vipassana, for at least three years, had participated in two or more weeklong retreats, and had used antidepressants in the last two years.

Most of our subjects reported that antidepressants helped them with multiple emotional, motivational, and cognitive functions. Emotional changes were consistent with an antidepressant effect. The painful emotions of anger and sadness decreased significantly, but fear showed a smaller response. The positive emotions of happiness, joy, love, and compassion all increased, as did self-esteem. Subjects also felt calmer and that their awareness was clearer. One would expect this kind of result, given that the subjects were no longer wrestling with intense, painful emotions.

Clearly the large majority of these meditators felt that they, and their spiritual practitice, benefited significantly from taking antidepressants. Several subjects reported that the antidepressants enabled them to recommence or significantly improve their meditation and spiritual practice.

James: So while there still is no cure for schizoaffective disorder and while I still suffer from hallucinations, paranoia, bipolar, etc., the medications have given me my life back to where I can pursue things like spritituality. It has allowed me sharpen my awareness of reality and this life whereas before I was living in a kind of fog and everything was out of focus. So I can attest to the benefits of psychotherapy and medications. Thus, when added with meditation and other Buddhist practices it forms a powerful combination that has helped me greatly.

It's time that we realize that interdepenence includes science helping spirituality and spirituality helping science. The two working together can accomplish great things and don't necessarily have to be at odds. Sure there are some tensions between the two groups but there are areas where they fit perfectly and accent each other to benefit a great many people.

~Peace to all beings~

Why I Chose Zen Buddhism.

When we practice zazen [Zen Meditation] our mind always follows our breathing. When we inhale, the air comes into the inner world. When we exhale, the air goes to the outer world. The inner world is limitless, and the outer world is also limitless. We say "inner world" or "outer world," but actually there is just one whole world. In this limitless world, our throat is like a swinging door.

The air comes in and goes out like someone passing through a swinging door. If you think, "I breathe," the "I" is extra. There is no you to say "I." What we call "I" is just a swinging door which moves when we inhale and when we exhale. It just moves; that is all. When your mind is pure and calm enough to follow this movement, there is nothing: no "I," no world, no mind nor body; just a swinging door.

--Shunryu Suzuki, Zen Mind, Beginner's Mind.

James: I often am asked why I chose Zen Buddhism over the other Buddhist traditions. I have written about this before but I'd like to write about it again, however, hopefully from a bit of a different angle. I respond well to the stripped down nature of Zen Buddhism as seen in this quote by the Zen legend Suzuki. I was raised in a very dogmatic religion and found it to be less helpful and I think that past experience led me in part to Zen, which (in my view) the least complicated form of Buddhism. For me it demystifies Buddhism and does a great job of focusing on the basics of Buddha's Dharma.

As well as the focus on Zazen (meditation) because that is something that I can easily understand and implement. I continue to study the sutras and canons and I certainly do not want my readers to think that I don't value them at all nor think them necessary to understanding Dharma because they do overall offer essential wisdom. That said, I find it more valuable in my personal practice to spend more time meditating than doing rituals (thought I find some ritual to beneficial) and keeping track of deities except as archetypes. I also like that Zen (in my view) is a bit more flexible in regards to dogma.

I find great success in Thich Nhat Hanh's style of Zen, which gets back to the very basic teachings of Buddha such as focusing on one's breath (as mentioned by Suzuki) while meditating and extending that formal meditation practice to everything that I do. So that mindfulness is the center of my practice, which cuts through the fat so to speak to better enable self-awakening. In my practice I have found that focusing on living in the present moment is where the essence of Buddhism flowers like a lotus.

I like that Buddhism has many flavors because it is more proof to me that karma is indeed apart of our lives. I believe it is this varied karma that, in part directs us toward one school of Buddhism over another. I'm currently reading the new book by His Holiness the Dalai Lama, "Becoming Enlightened" for a review and he speaks about these different variations in Buddhism.

When teachings at particular students are examined as a body of work, it is possible for their surface of literal meanings not to be in agreement, since their purpose is to help in ways appropriate to a student's current situation. Buddha himself sometimes taught this way, based on a trainee's need.

He also has some real gems of wisdom in warning against a stubborn, strict adherenace to dogma:

For a teaching to be a suitable source of refuge, it must pass the scrutiny of reasoned reflection and must be highly beneficial. A famous Chilean scientist told me that a scientific researcher should not be attached to science, and I believe that in much the same way a Buddhist should not be attached to Buddhist doctrine as such, but instead should value teachings and teachers that can bear investigation into their validity. The scientific attitude and the Buddhist approach are the same in this case.

Now, of course some dogma is essential to maintaining a religion but I have personally found that a little goes a long way. Remember though that this is my personal experience, I'm not a sanctioned teacher nor a Buddhist scholar but have seen the damaging effects of a heavy handed dogma.

So while I am a Zen student I find much to agree with in these two quotes from the Dalai Lama as well as from many of the great Theravadan teachers. I think all traditions of Buddhism have something essential to offer the others. I don't think that there is one form that is "superior" to any other but again that the variations are there to take into account our different karma, life experiences and socio-economic-cultural differences.

Using Science to Explain Biblical Stories. Part One: Sodom and Gommorah.

**NOTE: This is not an attempt to insult anyone so if you are insulted by this post then I apologize. I am starting a series here on how Biblical stories can often be explained by a modern understanding of science. I am doing it not out of a desire to destroy anyone's faith but from a personal interest explaining the stories I've heard during my 22 years as a Christian. I am a skeptic by heart and enjoy explaining the seemingly inexplicable.***

---

Sodom and Gomorrah were two ancient cities mentioned in the Bible most likely near the Dead Sea. The story in the Bible says that the town was destroyed by "God" because of the their "wickedness" by fire and brimstone (sulfur rock). So what does science have to say about this story?

As we know much of the Middle East sits above oil and natural gas fields as well as atop pockets of sulfur rock or brimstone. There are fault lines in the area where most scholars believe Sodom and Gomorrah existed as well as within much of the "Holy Land." Ancients didn't know much science and therefore natural disasters would be seen as "God's" doing and explained by man's "sinning."

So all it takes is a decent sized asteroid to hit the area, which would ignite the oil and natural gas fields nearby and underneath the city. As well as the igniting and throwing sulfur rocks into the air, which would then reign down upon the nearby cities of Sodom and Gomorrah. Thus giving off the effect of flaming rocks pouring down upon the cities and burning them to the ground.

Another explanation could stem from the many fault lines that exist in Israel, Jordan and throughout the Middle East. An earthquake could have cracked the Earth, which exposed natural gas pockets, pools of oil and veins of sulfur rock. All it would take is one spark from the many cooking fires to explode the pockets of gas, ignite the sulfur rock, which would reign back down upon the city burning it to the ground.

There are simple, (Occam's razor) scientific explanations for this event either way and so people who were not privy to science would seek to explain such a natural disaster with what they believed--"God." "God" was an understandable way to explain events, which were at the time mysterious in origin and thus very frightening.

~Peace to all beings~

Buddhism and Stem Cells.

I was watching a great lecture given by the great Sam Harris and wanted to relay some of the information he mentioned about stem cell research. He talked about the embryonic stem cells which seem to show the most potential and that the stem cells used from this form come from the blastocyst, which is a collection of 50-150 cells and is only 4-5 days old. It's not organized with a nervous system and it doesn't have a brain. And the blastocysts that the scientists and doctors want to use are excess embryos created for in vitro fertilization donated with consent and used for the research.

Now think about this, the brain of a common house fly has 100,000 cells that make up its brain and that is just a fly!! A fly has a brain and a fly has neurons. Yet most of us don't think twice about killing one of them, however, do worry about destroying a 5 day old ball of cells that will be destroyed anyway? It seems short sighted to not make the most of these blastocysts before they are discarded. As Harris describes it, "We know that more suffering is visited upon this Earth every time we swat a fly than when we kill a three day old human embryo."

Sam Harris again:

"On one had with have this collection of 50-150 cells and on the other we have little girls suffering from diabetes and full body burns, we have men and women with Parkinson's disease, we have literally tens of millions of people suffering terrible torments which could one day be remediated by this research." I submit to you, if you think that the interests of a virtually microscopic collection of cells; I mean if you had ten of these (blastocysts) in the palm or your hand right now you would never notice. If you think that the interests of these organisms may yet trump the interests of a girl with full body burns, you have had your ethical intuitions blinded by religious metaphysics. No ethical argument would get you there. No argument that talked about human suffering and its alleviation would get you there. It's not enough to say that the collection of human cells are potential human beings. Given genetic engineering every cell in our body with a nucleus is a potential human being, every time the president scratches his nose he's engaged in a holocaust of potential human beings.

Just take for a moment the claim that there are souls in this petri dish, that every human blastocyst, a three day old embryo is ensouled. Well unfortunately, embryos at that stage can split into twins so what happens, we have one soul becoming two souls? Embryos at an even later stage can fuse back into what is called a kymero, a single individual born of two embryos, so do we have two souls becoming one soul? This arithmetic of souls doesn't make much sense.

James: As a Buddhist I agree with everything Mr. Harris has said above. I don't believe that we complex humans have souls let alone blastocysts. As one Buddhist scientist described it, "It is the recycling of life." In other words it is using life that would be discarded anyway to better the life and reduce the suffering of a living breathing being. I don't see it any different than donating blood or donating an organ upon your death. In a manner of speaking It's all a type of rebirth and coming from a place that any Buddhist would recognize, compassion.

Want to what the Dalai Lama thinks, so did I as he's the closest thing we have to a central authority on Buddhism. I know not all of us follow his tradition, like myself, but I think we can all agree that he's an expert on the Buddhadharma:

From the Buddhist perspective, the general line of demarcation in ethics is based mainly on the long-term consequences-the results of the scientific research. It's very difficult to distinguish the ethical status of an action simply by judging the nature of the action itself. Much depends on the actor's motivation. A 'spiritual' act with negative motivation is essentially wrong. A more aggressive act may seem destructive, but if that specific action is carried out with altruistic motivation, and the proper sort of goal, then it could be positive. Of course, the motivation is not opaque to the individual who is engaged in the act. So, it very much depends on the scientists' motivation. If you as scientists have a sincerely compassionate motivation, and a sense of responsibility for the long-term implications, then carry out your work and make your decisions. If you have to weigh the benefit for a smaller community against a larger community, the larger community is more important, generally speaking.

But the basic point is that whatever is most beneficial is what needs to be pursued-or at least what an individual feels is probably going to be of most benefit and least negative is what that individual should carry out. On the question of gene replacement and manipulation, this is similar to things we are already doing at the gross physical level. For example kidney, heart, and liver transplants are now very common practice and patients benefit from these transplants. By extension of that principle, one could conceivably replace or change certain genetic components that are instrumental in causing diseases. But we should at least have a very high degree of knowledge of the implications, both the benefits and the side effects. And then, perhaps, in principle, this would be acceptable.

"But how do we understand at what point consciousness enters the embryo? This is problematic. A fetus, which is becoming a human is already a sentient being. But a fertilized egg may actually bifurcate into 8, 16, 32, 64 cells and become an embryo, and yet be naturally aborted and never become a human being. This is why I feel that for the formation of life, for something to actually become a human, something more is needed than simply a fertilized egg. It may be that what you do to a conglomeration of cells that have the possibility of becoming human entails no negative or karmically unwholesome act. However, when you're dealing with a configuration of cells that are definitely on the track to becoming a human being, it's a different situation. (James: My interpretation of this last sentence is that it becomes more problematic at a more advanced stage. For example I don't think many scientists are willing to exploit full blown fetuses for stem cells.)

"In some areas, Buddhism may have a different perspective from secular ethics. I think for example about human rights. From the Buddhist viewpoint, it is very difficult to claim that we human beings have special rights that are categorically different from animal rights. All sentient beings, all beings who have the experience of pain and pleasure, have the natural right to protect their existence and fulfill their aspiration to overcome suffering and enjoy happiness. The claim to rights is based on the capacity to experience pain and pleasure; it has nothing to do with intelligence, which is the main distinction between animals and human beings. They have the same experiences of pain and pleasure that we do.

James: As the DL reminds us, sentient beings are basically those who can feel pleasure and pain. So as blastocysts do not have central nervous systems to even register pain let alone a brain to experience I think it is safe to say that it is not yet human life. In conclusion my interpretation of the DL's teachings above definitely allow for stem cell research as long as it's done at the early blastocyst stage). Of course we know that we can not end all suffering in this world but it would be irresponsible of us not to help when and where we can to ease suffering.

~Peace to all beings~