From tyagi@HouseofKaos.Abyss.com Wed Nov 9 23:50:45 1994
From: tyagi mordred nagasiva
Subject: budhfemnsm.ack.txt
To: ceci@lysator.liu.se (Ceci Henningsson)
Date: Wed, 9 Nov 1994 14:48:54 -0800 (PST)
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL0]
Content-Type: text
Content-Length: 93878
To: Internet
From: Dharma Publications 'Gassho' (dharma@netcom.com)
Subject: Buddhism/Feminism (Anne Klein excerpt) (9400.budhfem.ack)
PRESENCE WITH A DIFFERENCE:
BUDDHISTS AND FEMINISTS ON SUBJECTIVITY
by Anne C. Klein
Postmodernist narratives about subjectivity are inadequate.
-- Jane Flax, //Thinking Fragments//
Without mindfulness there will be no reconstitution of already
acquired knowledge and consciousness itself would break to pieces,
become fragmentary. -- Soma Thera, //The Way of Mindfulness//
What is a woman? Simone de Beauvoir initiated a fruitful period of
reflection on this issue with her famous statement, "One is not born a
woman, but, rather, becomes one" (Beauvoir 1974, 301). Her emphasis on
"becoming" can be seen as prefiguring an entire corpus of feminist
postmodern reflection on the elusive nature of self and subjectivity. But,
as Judith Butler puts it in her rejoinder to Beauvoir's comment, "How can
one become a woman if one wasn't a woman all along?" (Butler 1990, 111).
With this she expresses a crucial piece of the essentialist resistance to
postmodern theories.
Much of contemporary feminist theory falls somewhere between the
essentialist and postmodern positions suggested by these statements.<1> I
suggest that the apparently irresolvable antipathy between these positions
rests in part on the incorporation of Western philosophical assumptions on
subjectivity, that is, on categories associated with awareness. I also
propose that two other elements in Western thought, incorporated by
feminists, contribute to this antipathy: (1) the strong tendency in
Western philosophy to structure inquiries into how things are and how they
are known as separate branches of investigation and (2) the profoundly
embedded contemporary Western assumption that subjectivity is to be
understood solely through its engagement with language. Although I focus
here on feminist writing, much of what follows is relevant also to
nonfeminist Western reflection.
The central dilemma of the essentialist-postmodern debate among feminists
is clear: How can contemporary Western women frame a sense of self that is
neither overly essentialized nor so contingently constructed that its very
existence and power is in question? The stakes of this debate are high.
These are not questions of theory only, but speak to deeply rooted visions
of what it means to be a "woman." How does one live with the powerful
pulls toward the different experiences that "essentialisms" and
"postmodernisms" suggest? How can a woman claim the kind of solid self
that gives her strength while still recognizing the multiple social,
economic, political, and gendered vectors that condition and constitute
this self? Through postmodern perspectives, for example, I can articulate
the complex processes of becoming by which identity is configured and
thereby honor the endless movement and connections between my life and
thoughts and those of myriad others, but I do not thereby recognize a
depth or "place of her own" in any individual subjectivity. Essentialists
tend to privilege such a place, thereby extolling the rootedness in self
that many find crucial to a sense of well-being, but essentialists also
tend to overlook social, political, or psychological particularities.
Thus, naming an essential identity can be empowering but also limiting,
and it is certainly philosophically problematic.<2> These issues of
personal power, connection, independence, and relationship lie at the
heart of the feminist essentialist-postmodern debate.
The way a women understands subjectivity is critical to her understanding
of the tensions between feminist essentialist and postmodernist
orientations. By "subjectivity" I mean to include the specific functions
and categories of knowing associated with the human mind. These, I
propose, have been unnecessarily curtailed in recent debates between
essentialists and postmodernists. I want to suggest a way of expanding the
scope and vocabulary of feminist discussions on subjectivity by drawing
from a religious and philosophical matrix especially rich in this regard.
My pivotal thesis is that an expanded understanding of subjectivity can
change the nature of the tension between feminist essentialist and
postmodern perspectives and, in the process, uncover and challenge a bias
toward mastery implicit in postmodern narratives. To explore this thesis I
here use selected material from Indian and Tibetan Buddhist traditions. I
propose that these traditions recognize positions analogous to the
essentialist and postmodern positions, yet read the relationship between
these positions quite different, understanding them as far more compatible
than contemporary feminists tend to do. The difference in these readings
is due largely to their different ways of understanding subjectivity.
Fundamental to Buddhist characterizations of subjectivity is a mental
state known as mindfulness, here meaning the ability to retain clear and
stable attention on a chosen object. Mindfulness gives evidence of both
essentialist-like and constructionist-like orientations, and will here
serve as my prime example of how a Buddhist discussion of subjectivity can
relate to feminist concerns. Mindfulness facilitates an "essential" type
of centering and at the same time is compatible with constructionist or
postmodern sensibilities because it perceives how the flux constitutes the
mind-body complex. Paradoxically, the more one's mindful concentration
develops, and the more grounded one is in present experience, the clearer
one is about the fragile and constructed nature of the self. I say
"paradoxically," but the tension of paradox is only in description, not in
the experience. In this way mindfulness and associated states of calm and
concentration can ameliorate the nature of the tension between
essentialist and postmodern perspectives in feminist contexts.
My discussion therefore begins with classic Buddhist descriptions of
mindfulness. I then consider how the particular affinity mindfulness has
with what Buddhists call the "unconditioned" relates to postmodern
emphases on the complementary processes of deferral, differentiation, and
supplementation as the only context in which narratives of selfhood occur.
From most postmodernist perspectives, the fact that context and meaning is
never complete and can always be further supplemented is evidence of the
impossibility of any person, object, or narrative being fully present.
Because meaning and subjectivity are in this sense never fully present,
they are always deferred. This is a critical observation for feminist
reflection on self and identity.
Paul Ricoeur once said that in the United States deconstruction is
especially prominent among literary critics but that it is in fact a way
of addressing religious issues. In this context he described
deconstruction as a way of unmasking the questions behind the answers of a
text or tradition.<3> Can we speak of the mind in any way except in terms
of what it knows? This is a question I see as implicit in Buddhist
traditions and one that becomes explicit when we juxtapose Buddhist and
feminist perspectives. A mental state such as mindfulness is not described
in terms of what is understood, but rather in terms of the mode of
awareness itself. When we look at feminist essentialist-postmodern debates
through a Buddhist lens, it appears that what most feminist reflections on
subjectivity have in common is their focal concern with the contents of
the subject: what she knows, what feelings she has, how she differentiates
and constructs herself through these. Buddhist traditions also take
enormous and explicit interest in what one knows and how one knows it.
They differ from most feminist reflections, however, in devoting much
attention to exploring the type of mind that knows various objects; this
interest is to be distinguished from an investigation of the ideas,
emotions, or other "contents" of the mind. Seldom discussed in Western
feminist discourse on subjectivity, mental states such as mindfulness and
concentration are difficult to map onto Western categories of
subjectivity.
- Dimensions of Subjectivity -
Teresa de Lauretis says that subjectivity arises from "a complex of habits
resulting from the semiotic interaction of 'outer world' and 'inner
world,' the continuous engagement of a self or subject in social reality"
(1984, 182.) <4> Judith Butler, equating the subject with the "I," finds
that identity is something that cannot pre-exist linguistic signification,
and that identity is above all a practice. What kind of practice? One that
"inserts itself in the pervasive and mundane signifying acts of linguistic
life" (1990, 145). Both positions are in keeping with postmodernists'
emphasis on the formative role of language in self-experience. I propose,
however, that it is insufficient to conceive of subjectivity and selfhood
only in relation to language and that the insistence on doing so is itself
a particular construction of Western intellectual history. As Jane Flax
has observed, philosophy privileges knowledge so exclusively that other
alternatives are not explored (1990, 194). Moreover, knowledge in
feminist postmodern contexts refers almost entirely to conceptually based
knowing, as opposed to visceral knowledge of the body, for example, or a
capacity to experience feeling vividly. Indeed, the split between feminist
essentialist and postmodern positions is often a split between emphasizing
the body (as do Mary Daly, Helene Cixous, and Adrienne Rich, for example)
or the mind (Judith Butler, Chris Weedon, Teresa de Lauretis). In this
way the feminist debate replicates a cultural tendency to bifurcate mind
and body, even though most feminists decry this tendency.
To go beyond this bifurcation requires that we recognize forms of
subjectivity which are viscerally connected to the body and for which
"knowledge" in the sense of information is not the sole criterion. There
are sources in recent Western reflection for such visceral awareness,
though they have not often been brought to bear on discussions among
essentialists and postmodernists. Flax, for example, points to Melanie
Klein's discourse on an infant's instinctive curiosity about her mother's
body. I would mention also a telling passage in Emily Martin's discussion
of the subjective state of women in the process of giving birth. This is a
time when what is known is not the central experiential criterion. But
what is? Michael Odent, whose clinic in Pithiviers, France, has pioneered
an especially supportive environment for women giving birth, describes it
like this: "Women seemed to forget themselves and what was going on around
them during the course of an unmedicated labor. They get a faraway look in
their eyes, forget social conventions, lose self-consciousness and self-
control. . ... I have found it very difficult to describe this shift to a
deeper level of consciousness during a birth. I had thought of calling it
'regression,' but I know that the word sounds pejorative, evoking a return
to some animal state. 'Instinct' is a better term, although it, too,
resonates with moralistic overtones" (quoted in Martin 1992, 163).
Indeed, the terms we have are limited. The problem with words such as
"instinct" is also part of the problem with essentialist vocabularies;
they imply the demise of the kind of individual personhood valued in North
American and European cultures, and they seem to identify the self with an
"acultural" body. Martin herself suggests a more positive frame for what
Odent describes:
Instead of seeing the Pithiviers women as engaged in a "natural"
lower-order activity, why can we not see them as engaged in a
higher-order activity? The kinds of integration of body and mind
fostered by the psychophysiological approach and others, the kinds
of wholly involved activity captured by the metaphors of the
journey and the trance, could well be taken as higher, more
essentially human, more essentially cultural forms of consciousness
and activity. Here, perhaps, are whole human beings, all their
parts interrelated, engaged in what may be the only form of truly
unalienated labor now available to us. (Martin 1992, 164).
In order to encompass subjectivity more fully and to dissolve barriers
between essentialist and postmodern positions, we need to include among
our categories of subjectivity a dimension of mind that is not primarily
linguistic or conceptual, and yet (unlike Klein or Martin's examples) is
capable of being cultivated, and therefore is to be included among
"higher-order" and "cultural" human activities. This is a possibility that
promises to reframe many areas important to women -- from how birthing and
motherhood are valued, to relieving the ancient dualisms between mind and
body, to gaining a new perspective on contemporary essentialist-postmodern
antagonisms.
- Mindfulness: Coherence and Constructedness -
In ancient India, would-be surgeons were presented with a leaf floating on
water and a sharp cutting instrument. Their challenge was to sever the
leaf without sinking it. Too strong a stroke, and the leaf was submerged;
too timid an effort, and it remained uncut. "One who is clever shows the
scalpel stroke on it by means of a balanced effort (Buddhaghosa 1976,
I:141). The balance of the surgeon serves as a model for the balance
required in mindfulness. This criterion of balance, like the related
criteria of alertness, laxity, and excitement, suggests ways to reflect on
how the mind is, apart from its knowledge or feelings. This is not to deny
the profound intertwining of language and subjectivity, but to say that
the mind is not only its linguistic associations; it has a depth and
dimension to it not entirely governed by language or analysis. This
dimension is not clearly accounted for in either feminist essentialist or
postmodern discussions of subjectivity. In Indian, Tibetan, and other
Buddhist traditions, however, subjectivity is not simply a concatenation
of details, but has a "visceral" existence of its own.
Mindfulness is also important because it is said to entail a focusing
capacity beyond the level of ordinary flickering attention. Theravada, the
Buddhist tradition still extant in Sri Lanka, Thailand, and Burma, takes
the Foundations of Mindfulness Sutra as central to its meditation
practice. This text teaches mindful observation first of the breath, in
order to stabilize the mind, then of the body and mind, along with the
existential attributes of these, such as impermanence.<5> This focusing
capacity makes it possible to notice particular details to which one was
previously impervious.
For example, one's arm usually feels solid and constant. With practice it
comes to feel, at least during a meditation session, like an ongoing flux
of mini sensations with no overarching "arm" except as a name given to
these myriad sensations. If one turns attention to other mental processes,
"mind" too is experienced as only flux. Whether one places attention on
breath, body, or mind itself, what was formerly experienced as solid and
cohesive is revealed as quite the opposite, so that the object seems to
dissolve, and "having seen the dissolution of that object, one
contemplates the dissolution of the consciousness that had that as its
object" (Buddhaghosa 1976, II:751). As Buddhaghosa wrote in his fifth
century work //Path of Purification (Visuddhimagga)//, a classic
expression of Theravadin phenomenology, "all formations [e.g., the
person's mental and physical constituents] which keep on breaking up,
[are] like fragile pottery being smashed, like fine dust being
dispersed.... Just as a man with eyes standing on the bank of a pond or on
the bank of a river during heavy rain would see large bubbles appearing on
the surface of the water and breaking up as soon as they appeared, so too
he sees how formations break up all the time" (Buddhaghosa 1976, II:752).
Mind and body are revealed as nothing but a great disappearing act. The
more one's mindful concentration develops, the clearer one is about one's
fragile and constructed nature. At the same time, one is physically
grounded in present experience. No matter how intense the insight into
flux, one's own steady focus vouches viscerally for meaningful personal
continuity.
Fredric Jameson has suggested that modern Westerners, unable to grasp
their social context in its entirety, instead satisfy themselves with
focusing on their own particular place in that larger whole; coherence in
terms of social situatedness has been replaced by this exercise of
cognitive mapping. In feminist postmodern reflection as well, the idea
that mind is always and primarily constituted by context crowds out the
possibility of any sense of completeness, or wholeness; hence, perhaps the
fascination with supplementation. By contrast, mindfulness, and the mental
focus that develops from it, is described as a unifying dynamic and seen
as lending coherence to the subject even as it reveals the endless flux of
self and world. Put another way, mindfulness and the dimensions of
concentration related with it simultaneously demonstrate the self's
constructedness and its fully viable agency. This too is not just a
theoretical issue; it is perhaps the fundamental existential oxymoron: all
my life I am changing (getting older, dying) and at the same time
remaining the same (retaining a sense of identity). Mindfulness, even of
dissolution, is grounding. It is an experience of being strongly centered
in the present and in oneself. Such grounding in the face of dissolution
is the beginning of constructive personal strength.
In its function as a witness, mindfulness is characterized as a silent
subject, saying nothing itself. This silence is not an inability to speak,
but the ability to not speak, and thereby sometimes to be free from
domination by the patternings of language and thought.
If we can understand mind as having such a silent dimension, then
mindfulness is not yet another voice, yet another information-bearing
strand, in the internal dialogue.<6> It resembles the "evenly hovering
attention" of a psychoanalyst (something no one in the profession would
wish to call "instinctive" even though this is a subject state which, like
that of the Pithiviers women, suggests a "shift to a deeper state of
consciousness").<7> Again, what is important about such a mind is how it
flows, rather than what it knows. And this importance resonates throughout
the mind-body complex. A number of feminist women have written about the
importance of mindful clarity. The wandering that Mary Daly chronicles
requires immense awareness and self-knowledge (1985, xii, 89). Doris
Lessing, herself influenced by the meditative traditions of Sufism, makes
awareness the starting point of Martha Quest's spiritual odyssey in //The
Four Gated City//. Martha learns how to make herself "alive and light and
aware" (37) she knows the advantages, walking in the London rain, of
having "her head cool, watchful, alert" (38). She knows too the sense of
"a quiet, empty space, behind which stood an observing presence." Here
also mindfulness is described in terms of mental characteristics other
than knowledge. But from a Buddhist perspective there is little in the way
of an epistemological clarification of what this is or how it is
cultivated.
Mindfulness is physically centering. Quieting the processes of distraction
stills the breath and soothes the body. Indeed, acknowledging the intimate
relationship between bodily and emotional or cognitive experience is vital
to many meditative traditions. Physical and mental processes are not two
halves of a whole, but two avenues of access into the fully integrated
complex in which they participate. Subjective shifts, in this view, always
involve the entire person. Calming, for example, is associated with a
variety of pleasurable physical sensations, from feeling one's body as
preternaturally soft or light, to -- far more rarely but also more
famously -- intense sexual pleasure.
Mindfulness, says Buddhaghosa, reveals mind and body as functions in
constant communication, always shaping and responding to the other "like a
drum and the sound of a drum" (690). Tibetan Buddhists describe mind as
inseparable from the inner currents (rlung, prana) on which it rides. As
the inner currents flow through the body, they facilitate physical as well
as mental movement. Watching the breath affects the movement of these
currents, as does regulating the breath through slow and rhythmic
chanting, another important technique for soothing the mind. These
traditions also emphasize that consciousness is never fully disembodied;
it is always associated with the subtle physicality of internal
currents.<8> This is why some esoteric traditions teach a variety of
postures to enhance their meditation practices: the placement of body
directly affects the way in which currents of energy course within it, and
these energies in turn affect all manner of internal experience --
emotional, spiritual, conceptual.
Mindfulness is grounding because of the way it globally affects one's
experience of self and world. Mindfulness allows one to accept the present
and to accept oneself in the present. This is accomplished not by
altering, accessing, or restructuring the contents of the mind, but by
altering the tone of consciousness.
For all these reasons, the subject is not to be understood only as a
language-constituted instrument. Focused attention reveals depth as well
as informational breadth, a depth not wholly navigable through the
language-bearing coordinates articulated in postmodern reflections. The
difference between experiencing one's state of mind and experiencing its
"contents" is one of the most important subjective differences in
Buddhism; it is a distinction that has no real parallel in contemporary
theory. From a Buddhist perspective, postmodernists have a strangely
disembodied notion of mind, precisely because there is no room to take
account of the state of the subject, apart from the constructs that are
its contents.
>From drm3p@darwin.clas.virginia.edu Mon Aug 8 15:40:42 1994
Received: from nova.unix.portal.com (nova.unix.portal.com [156.151.1.101]) by jobe.shell.portal.com (8.6.4/8.6.4) with ESMTP id PAA16831 for ; Mon, 8 Aug 1994 15:40:27 -0700
Received: from virginia.edu (uvaarpa.Virginia.EDU [128.143.2.7]) by nova.unix.portal.com (8.6.7/8.6.4) with SMTP id PAA12054 for ; Mon, 8 Aug 1994 15:40:12 -0700
Received: from darwin.clas.virginia.edu by uvaarpa.virginia.edu id aa25634;
8 Aug 94 18:40 EDT
Received: (from drm3p@localhost) by darwin.clas.Virginia.EDU (8.6.8/8.6.6) id SAA66802 for Tyagi@HouseOfKaos.Abyss.com; Mon, 8 Aug 1994 18:40:01 -0400
From: David Ross Mcirvine
Message-Id: <199408082240.SAA66802@darwin.clas.Virginia.EDU>
Subject: GASSHO v1n5 (Part 3 of 3) (fwd)
To: tyagi
Date: Mon, 8 Aug 94 18:40:01 EDT
X-Mailer: PENELM [version 2.3.1 PL11]
Status: OR
According to Barry Kapke:
>From daemon Fri Aug 5 11:27:59 1994
Date: Fri, 5 Aug 1994 07:34:17 -0700
From: dharma@netcom.com (Barry Kapke)
Message-Id: <199408051434.HAA05638@netcom7.netcom.com>
Subject: GASSHO v1n5 (Part 3 of 3)
To: GASSHO-subscriber@netcom.com
The absence in contemporary feminist theory of specific attention to the
kinds of subjective shifts Buddhist traditions describe partly results
from the already mentioned separation, in the West, of investigation into
how things are and into how they are known, that is, the distinctness of
epistemology from ontology.<9> Feminist theory both perpetuates this
separation and, in some quarters, protests it, observing that such
separation contributes to the abstractness of modern philosophy, against
which feminists seek theory anchored in experience.<10> Most Indo-Tibetan
Buddhist traditions intimately and explicitly entwine ontological and
epistemological issues. That is, the attention given to ontological
descriptions of persons or things is generally matched by detailed
consideration of what happens to the subject who knows this. Buddhists
must have categories of mind which are not linked with language since they
do not find all epistemological error to be a function of language.<28>
Thus, in the Buddhist traditions considered here, silence in the face of
language suggests a subjective dimension not primarily governed by
language, a dimension that offers a coherence that is not necessarily a
narrative or cognitive coherence.
From a Buddhist perspective, the subjectivity described in postmodern
literature as lacking a coherent narrative, or as emerging through a play
of language-based differences, is inappropriately thin. Little attention
is paid to its broader dimensions, meaning something other than its
conceptual, ideational, or emotional activities. Failure to consider such
dimensions seems to me a crucial factor in making the postmodern self seem
too thin or monodimensional <12> to provide a proper basis for feminist
agendas. If, however, subjectivity is not limited to conceptual and
emotional functioning, there opens up a new dimension of performance, a
new source of personal power, and a different arena from which to connect
with the world's diffuseness. In these ways, mindfulness eases the sense
of being caught "inside" oneself, as if isolated from the wider world. Its
subjective space need not entirely be localized inside the body, because
to go deep enough "inside" is also sometimes to touch a point that
connects with a vast neither-external-nor-internal-world. For all these
reasons I believe it is important for women to acknowledge and be on
intimate terms with an experience of personhood that is not simply a
constellation of learned codes, assorted information, and unique personal
expressions. These latter must not be lost, but they cannot be the sole
basis for selfhood either. Postmodern theories, unlike Buddhist theories,
are very articulate about a subject's position among the coordinates of
race and class and other historical, socio-economic, and political
realities. The kind of "constructedness" of which classic Buddhist forms
of mindfulness take note is not this sort of constructedness. Mindfulness
is not a matter of interpreting one's position. Thus Buddhists would be
unlikely to find the subject reduced to a "site of competing discourses,"
as it often is in postmodern descriptions, both feminist and nonfeminist.
There are no explicit Buddhist analyses of class, race, or gender, for
example. Buddhist perspectives we consider here could agree that social
positioning through race, class, or gender, combined with one's
interpretation of these, significantly affects consciousness, but they do
not understand the whole dimension of subjective functioning to be
constituted by these. However, insofar as Buddhist philosophical
traditions are often concerned with the process by which thoughts and
images shape the self, the matter of culturally produced "ideals" is a
form of self-construction important for both Buddhist and feminist
reflection. Therefore let us consider the relationship between ideals and
subjectivity from a Buddhist perspective. Might mindfulness and
concentration suggest ways to avoid treating the self as a territory to be
conquered, governed, or colonized by ideals?
- Mindfulness and Ideals -
I once overheard a conversation between two American Buddhist
practitioners. An apparent newcomer asked a more seasoned student, "How
has meditation changed you?" She appeared to expect a triumphal story of
vanquishing unwanted personality traits by embracing a more ideal style of
personhood. The object of this inquiry, responding not at all to her air
of anticipation, said with mild surprise, "Change? I don't want to change.
I just want to be there." Ideals are problematic philosophically as well
as experientially. To assume any type of overly simple relation to an
ideal is also to assume a unitariness of subject belied by both
postmodernists and Buddhists; it also suggests, untenably from most
feminist perspectives, that the appropriate ideals are already fully
conceived.
To have mindfulness, Buddhists often say, is to accept what is and to
offset the unbalancing future-orientation that occurs when one is focused
primarily on the ideal one would like to become, at the expense of
noticing or appreciating what one is.<13> The potential disadvantages of a
quest for self, or any religious quest, being dominated by ideals are
fourfold: (1) hindering self-knowledge, (2) demeaning the self, (3)
providing a means for manipulation, and (4) continuing the type of
oppositional style that feminists explicitly seek to overcome.
Merely a gentle observer, mindfulness is a way of being there. It does so
by fostering a capacity to relate to oneself without trying to oppose,
judge, or change what is observed. Because it permits self-knowledge
without the crippling presence of an ideal against which one inevitably
falls short, mindfulness can be understood as departing from the urge to
master, override, rein in, or otherwise manipulate the self. In this way
mindfulness' quality of self-acceptance provides an important
counterweight to the narrative of ideals and to the paradigm of mastery
often associated with the implementation of ideals.
- Being There: Presence with a Difference -
Buddhist descriptions of subjectivity in connection with mindfulness and
meditation suggest the possibility of a subjectivity not wholly governed
by words and therefore not subject to the kind of fracturing associated
with feminist postmodern or constructionist perspectives. The Buddhist
descriptions of subjectivity referred to here also suggest a self that has
the kind of unified strength described by essentialists yet, unlike the
selves they describe, is also characterized by a coherence that does not
deteriorate when one recognizes the self's constructed nature. These
descriptions, and associated practices, offer one a sense of her mind as
an extensive, even inexhaustible, resource of strength and fresh
perspectives. Such a subjectivity is of particular interest to women,
because women are today explicitly concerned with finding modes of
expression and reflection that are as free as possible from the
internalized cultural restraints on women's being.
We have said that the silent subject of Buddhist epistemological
description has an ontological analogue, which Buddhists variously call
emptiness or selflessness, meaning the absence of existing independent of
causes and conditions. All persons and things are qualified by this
unconditioned absence. The category of the unconditioned is here, unlike
in postmodern theory, considered compatible with a theory that emphasizes
the conditionality of phenomena in general.
Knowing emptiness requires a considerable measure of clarity, stability,
and intensity,<14> together with associated shifts in breathing, posture,
and other physiological processes. It is this absence which is engaged by
the "wisdom" for which Buddhist traditions are so famous. Insight into
emptiness is an experience replete with meaning because it is empty of
content. This is not a matter of putting together conceptually organized
bits of information, but of reorienting to a cognition that viscerally
unites mental and physical dimensions.
What kind of presence is possible in relation to this absence which is
emptiness? Should Buddhists be judged naive for claiming that the "truth"
of emptiness can be fully present to consciousness? What kind of "truth"
is at issue here anyway? And what kind of consciousness?<15> Direct and
full realization of emptiness does not mean that emptiness is completely
known in the sense of the subject having mastered or observed some "thing"
in a way that brooks no supplementation.<16> Developing an experience of
emptiness does not involve further knowledge "about" it but rather
increased concentration and focus on it. Concentration, like the
mindfulness that makes it possible, is not governed by language. This
concentrated and nonverbal witness does not have the same relationship to
traces of difference as do other more language-based modes of awareness.
Postmodern philosophers argue against what they characterize as the
essentialist assumption that a thing is just what it is, and nothing else,
and can be known as such (Derrida 1976. 7-8, 20-158-9).<17> For Jacques
Derrida, writing is the archetypal situation of shifting differences which
characterizes every aspect of our lives; it is a performance of the
impossibility of presence (Derrida 1982; 1981, esp. 17-32). For him,
however, as for feminist theorists influenced by him, the impossibility of
presence rests on premises not relevant to the Buddhist claim we are
considering.<18> For Middle-Way and other philosophical traditions within
Buddhism, the salient criterion is not how much of an object one knows, or
how much information one has captured, but how focused, intense, and clear
the knowing mind itself is. The unconditioned emptiness cannot be
communicated fully through language, but neither can ordinary things be
fully expressed by language or known by thought. Indeed, much of Indo-
Tibetan Buddhism understands language to be a system of imperfect and
indirect representation.<19> Both Buddhists and postmodern feminists
reject naive theories of representation or "pipeline" models of meaning
wherein a word or thought is considered "fully" to express or convey that
to which it refers.<20> In this way, Buddhist epistemology agrees with
feminist and other postmodern emphases on the limitations of linguistic
representation. But when emptiness is known directly, thought and language
are absent. At the same time emptiness, the absence of independent,
unconditioned existence, is fully present to one's experience. Nothing
about emptiness is deferred or differentiated from one's mind. Yet, there
is nothing particular in emptiness to be assumed present in the first
place. It is a mere absence.
Buddhist descriptions of awareness suggest that no matter how many
thoughts, feelings, or sensory impressions it accesses, these can never
fully characterize or dominate the mind. There is always room for
something else. In other words, as I have already emphasized, Buddhist
traditions are inclined to understand a concentrated mind as fully
"present" to its object, regardless of whether or not that object is fully
known. This is because the critical issue here is stability and
attentiveness, rather than the amount of information gathered. The fact
that ordinary objects of the senses can never be fully known is in fact
something on which most Buddhist and postmodern theories agree. However,
this inability of the conceptual mind to fully know an object and the
impossibility of an object being "just what it is" are for Buddhists not
disruptive of subjective coherence, whereas they are often described as
disruptive by feminist postmodernists. These latter do not accept presence
because no matter how broadly the boundaries of a person are drawn, there
is always something included and something excluded. Descriptions can
always be further supplemented; they are never complete. <21> This is
where the issues of presence and the problem of ideals converge. Both are
predicated on mastery; both are philosophically problematic. On the other
hand, a feminist such as Helene Cixous, whose work partakes of both
essentialist and postmodern orientations, celebrates the impossibility of
circumscribing woman. She rejoices in woman's "endless body, without
'end,' without principal 'parts'" (Cixous 1986, 87). Yet what she says is
also a cause of concern. How can an endless and therefore shapeless
subject shape an identity? How can one avoid being wholly colonized by a
limited set of ideals or roles?
- Mindfulness and Mastery -
Only a tradition that acknowledges the significance of internal silence
can feature its ontological analogue, the unconditioned emptiness, as part
of a path to liberation. This kind of subject is yet to be situated within
Western understandings of subjectivity. The silent subject united with an
"emptiness" that is the absence of its own previously misconstrued status
occupies a position distinct from either of the narratives which,
according to Lyotard, have dominated the modern West: the Enlightenment
narrative, exemplified by Kant, and the narrative of the Spirit,
exemplified by Hegel. In both of these, knowledge of is key. Knowledge is
the ideal, the legitimizer, and the redeemer. Who would deny the
significance of knowledge? Not feminists, certainly, and not Buddhists
either. Without in any way undermining the significance of various types
of knowledge, the subject, need not be defined only by what it knows. The
subjective dimension of silent concentration offers a space for the
subject apart from its dominating knowledge, and the dimension of the
unconditioned is the arena in which it functions.
Women, and men as well, need an epistemology that allows room for multiple
incoherencies and incongruities. The type of coherence suggested by
attentive focusing in no way contradicts engagement with a multiplicity of
ideas, stories, histories, of race, class, gender, or personal style. One
remains physically centered and focused in the midst of observing this.
When the mind is understood as an open expanse, there is always room for
something more. When that same mind has a dimension that retains its open,
unlanguaged status even -- or especially -- in the face of dissolution and
multiplicity, its dynamic of coherence cannot be interrupted by
particularity or incongruency. This dimension is greatly facilitated by an
ontology which expresses the inessential essence -- for example, emptiness
-- considered an attribute of persons and things but which is not itself
governed by their particular qualities. In brief, such subjective
spaciousness becomes available through subjective processes not rooted in
language and through engaging an object not governed only by
particularity. This points to a sharp distinction between Buddhist and
contemporary feminist sensibilities. Again, the crucial issue for the
Buddhist traditions is not the extent to which one is master of the
details of an object, but the way in which one is centered in awareness
itself. By contrast, agency and mastery are focal concerns for those who
propose language and writing as the governing metaphor of experience, as
evidenced by the near-hysteria (highly intellectualized) at the
possibility of their dismantling or demise. From a Buddhist perspective
the contemporary fascination with diffrance suggests an intellectual
history that did not take sufficient note of the interdependent and
conditioned nature of persons or things in the first place.<22> To that
extent, Buddhist philosophers would be in sympathy with the kind of
correction postmodernists seek. But, why make such a fuss about diffrance
except for the desire of complete possession thwarted by it? The bias
toward "mastering" against which postmodernism poses itself resurfaces
here.
Partly because of this fascination with mastery, the unmasterability of
the textualized world becomes, in postmodern reflection, the most
mysterious and interesting thing about it. This at least is my reading of
the "question" behind the "answer" of diffrance, including its insistence
on not really being an answer. Such fascination is a compelling
undercurrent of the postmodern deconstruction of Enlightenment
sensibilities. The glory days of old when individuality, agency, and truth
could be enshrined as cultural icons only lend drama to their present
dethroning. I agree with Flax that women are by definition left outside
this story-line (Flax, 1990, 215).<23> Like the unconditioned and the
nonverbal, women too are "other" to the deconstructive network, for the
unconditioned and the nonverbal, like women, are unmasterable through the
ordinary channels of power, especially language; they all lie outside the
male-ordered fascination with agency, legacy, and its demise.
Is it an accident that women, mother, mater, maternal ground, and
foundations are all excluded or severely limited by contemporary theory?
As Nancy Hartsock put it, "Why is it, just at the moment in Western
history when previously silenced populations have begun to speak for
themselves.... that the concept of the subject and the possibility of
discovering/creating a liberating 'truth' become suspect?"<24> Useful as
some of Derrida's observations and other postmodern insights have been to
feminist theory, women and others who would think new thoughts must make
claims outside this "story-line" by swimming past its boundaries into the
deeper dimensions of subjectivity.
The Buddhist story-line we are following here is different. It requires
the possibility of subjective silence and objective absence. Silence and
its analogue, the unconditioned emptiness, as well as the compatibility
between the conditioned and unconditioned, suggest a constellation of
connections that contemporary theory as presently constituted does not
recognize. Its suspicions of foundationalism conspire against this.
The subjective dimensions proposed in Buddhist materials suggest a
centeredness that is essentialist-like in its power and uncomplicated
identity, and yet avoids the overly narrow definitions of "female essence"
that lead many feminists to cast aside essentialist aspirations. At the
same time, I believe it is critical for women to acknowledge the need for
groundedness and for some degree of personal "presence." Yet, when
capturing or occupying is not at issue, the question of presence loses its
punch. So does the poignancy of women's position as object.
Feminist descriptions have yet to develop a vocabulary for functions other
than capture or knowledge by which subjects engage their objects. Perhaps
here lies a clue to a unique womanly gesture, one that, like mindfulness,
proceeds in ways other than through the differential of frustrated
mastery. I call it a gesture, because in gestures, words are not all that
matter. Persons communicate through language, but also through the flesh,
blood, and rushing currents of feeling and energy by which they are also
constituted. This womanly gesture, in which language may participate
without becoming the ruling metaphor, neither masters, succumbs to, nor
even excludes, its male audience. In this way, it avoids being a "master"
narrative.
Postmodernists in general and feminist postmodernists in particular have
opened up an enormous intellectual space in which to reconsider the
relationship of self and knowledge. Feminists have integrated gender
concerns into this space as well. But a subjective experience that moves
from textuality to a different style of subjectivity altogether is not
available in postmodern thought as currently constituted. Feminist
appropriations of postmodernist structures have, by and large, conceived
of themselves as opposed to essentialist feminist perspectives.<25> For
Buddhists, the possibility of subjectivity not anchored in language or
oppositionality suggests a way in which the strength and agency associated
with essentialist perspectives can be integrated with a full
acknowledgment of the complexity of a woman's identity in the contemporary
climate.
Thus, I think it extremely worthwhile to recognize a dimension or category
of subjectivity that is not bounded, constructed, or defined solely by
language. Contemporary women's lives, replete with incongruous elements of
culture, race, religion, or worldview, can be a cause for celebration so
long as one's entire possibility for coherence does not lie with a
verbalized narrative coherence. The mastery of detail and nuance that this
would require is impossible. But this impossibility need not stand in the
way of subjective or personal coherence, for keen and focused attention
inevitably reveals that multiplicity makes the only kind of whole that can
be one.
NOTES
~~~~~
Condensed from my forthcoming book, //Meeting the Great Bliss Queen:
Buddhists Feminists, and the Art of the Self// (Boston: Beacon Press, Fall
1994), which discusses Buddhist and feminist understandings of self,
subjectivity, and compassionate relationship in the light of their
respective cultural contexts, and introduces ritual and philosophical
elements associated with a female Buddha known as the Great Bliss Queen
(bde chen rgyal mo) in order to express and sometimes bridge critical
differences between modern secular feminist voices and traditional
Buddhist ones.
In attempting to mark out major connections and dissonances between
Buddhist and Western ideas of subjectivity, it is impossible to find
language not already embedded with either Western or Buddhist
philosophical intent. Nonetheless, one proceeds.
I am grateful to readers of the chapters of my book from which this
article is drawn: Harvey Aronson, Lauren Bryant, Elizabeth Long, Helena
Michie, Michael Fischer, Janet Gyatso, Katherine Milun, Meredith Skura,
Sharon Traweek, and Philip Wood. In addition I am grateful to the two
anonymous readers for Hypatia and its editors. I also thank Steven D.
Goodman for very helpful comments on a penultimate draft of this article.
<1.> It is, of course, well known that there are many differences among
essentialists themselves, as among postmodernists. See, for example, Schor
(1989). In my references to these positions, I extract principles that are
common, though not necessarily universal, to feminist essentialists or
postmodernists respectively. Some writers, for example, Luce Irigary and
Hlne Cixous reflect both essentialist and postmodern orientations. Luce
Irigaray describes a kind of postmodern essence when she writes: "Woman is
neither open nor closed. She is indefinite, in-finite, form is never
complete in her" (Irigaray l985, 229). Julia Kristeva, on the other hand,
flatly finds any sort of coherence to be a mistake, observing that "the
belief that 'one is a woman' is almost as absurd and obscurantist as the
belief that 'one is a man'" (Kristeva 1981, 137).
<2.> Linda Alcoff observes that minority voices in the West are
particularly sensitive to the dangers of essentialism, and for this reason
Black, Hispanic, Chicana, and other women of color overwhelmingly reject
essentialist conceptions of gender (Alcoff, l988. 412). See Anzaldua
(1987), Walker (1982), and Moraga (1987). My colleague Angela Valenzuela
has pointed out in conversation the complexity of the one hand, minority
persons' need to define themselves in opposition to a majority, and, at
the same time their objections to having an identity solely defined by
that context. Nonetheless some theorists such as Paul Smith call for a
reassessment of essentialism's political efficacy (See Smith 1988, 44).
See also Fuss's discussion of this in connection with Irigaray (Fuss,
1989, 70ff).
<3.> Paul Ricoeur in colloquium with Harvard Divinity School Faculty,
Fall, 1983
<4.> For de Lauretis's main sources for her interpretations of Lacan, Eco
and Peirce see Alcoff (1988. 424 n. 45).
<5.> For a translation and discussion of this sutra see Thera (1984). For
further discussion of mindfulness by modern Theravadins see Thera (1984)
and Rahula (l980).
<6.> Mind is then not to be understood only through the metaphor of
"conversation" and the differentiating play of words as it often is today,
as, for example in the work of Bakhtin (the "dialogic consciousness" and
Rorty's work on Freud). See Flax (1990, 217) with reference to Rorty
(1986).
<7.> This is a kind of quiet mental scanning that allows the analyst to
listen closely and clearly to the analysand, and allows the analysand to
be aware of what is coming to her own consciousness. (Thanks to Meredith
Skura for this observation in the course of a seminar sponsored by the
Rice Center for Cultural Studies, Fall 1990.)
<8.> This internal energy, however, does not fit into the usual categories
by which contemporary feminists consider the extent to which thought or
consciousness is affected by bodily experience. Therefore, whereas in some
contemporary theories the acknowledged difficulty of locating any aspect
of mind that is not affected by bodily experience is associated with
skepticism regarding the possibility of "pure" consciousness, in the
Buddhist traditions considered here it is not. See Flax (1990, 62).
Consider also Cixous' emphasis on the body and Kristeva's alignment of
feminine and masculine uses of language with feminine and masculine
libidinal energy. See discussion by Weedon (1987, 70ff).
<9.> For an excellent discussion of this see Jane Flax (1980, 21ff). See
also Bateson (1982, 313-14).
<10.> Jane Flax observes that, given the repressive contexts that Western
women are likely to encounter, feminism has a special interest in theories
that construct self while taking account of the full complexity of
subjectivity (Flax 1986, 93).
<11.> This is because Buddhist traditions are not simply philosophical
systems that purport to describe the world and knowledge of it, but are
soteriological systems that claim the ability to describe the world in
such a way that one can become freed from it (conversation with Steven
Goodman, March 1, 1994, Houston Texas.) Language is not the only reason
one is caught up in the world. For example, the Gelukba Consequentialist
(Prasangika) school regards the errors it seeks to correct as not only
mental or conceptual but also as pervading sensory perception. Moreover,
sensory perception can, at least in Buddhist theory, operate without
conceptual overlay. For a discussion of Buddhism's claim to deal with a
level of error more primal than language, see Napper (1989, 92ff.).
<12.> This term derived in conversation with Steven Goodman.
<13.> In the literature on calm abiding, "mindfulness" is distinguished
from the function of introspection (samprajanaya, shes bzhin); this latter
is the factor of mind that notices whether faults such as laxity or
excitement are present. See Hopkins (1983, 74-76). A classic Mahayana
distinction between mindfulness and introspection is made in Shantideva's
//Engaging in the Bodhisattva Deeds,// Chap. 4. See Cox (1992, 67-108).
<14.> These are characteristics classically associated with calm abiding,
the minimal level of concentration required for actual insight into the
unconditioned emptiness. See Lodr (1986, 166). Calm abiding is acquired
developmentally, culminating the "nine mental states" (sems gnas dgu).
Facility with mindfulness, "the power of mindfulness," is said to be
completed at the fourth of these states.
<15.> Indeed, a synonym for a nonconceptual mind is a "complete engager"
(sgrub 'jug; *viddhi-pravrti) because it is considered to engage every
aspect of its object. In this sense it is fully present to the aspects of
the object which present themselves to consciousness. Discussed in Napper
(1980) and Klein (1986 Chapter 3). For a detailed discussion of the idea
that sense consciousnesses "take on the aspect" of the objects they know,
see Klein (1986, Chpt. 3).
<16.> I draw here primarily from the Middle Way (Madhyamika) philosophy in
the tradition of the Indian scholars Nagarjuna and Candrakirti as
interpreted by Tsong-kha-pa, founder of the Gelukba order, and other
scholars in his tradition, who incorporated many elements of the
epistemology of the Indian scholastics Dignaga and Dharmakirti.
<17.> For an interesting discussion of this aspect of presence see Culler
(1982, 105).
<18.> As Flax observes, for Derrida writing is not bound up with the myth
of an "originary or modified form of presence." See Derrida (1978, 211-
12).
<19.> Words do not elicit the actual emptiness, any more than the word
"table" elicits a complete table. See Klein (1986, 134-140).
<20.> See for example, Culler (1982, 92ff.) and Derrida (1976, 12.ff). See
also Derrida (1976, 7-8; 20, and 158-159). Indeed, presence and absence
derive from the same Latin root //es//. (American Heritage Dictionary
[1973, 1515]). For an accessible discussion of this aspect of presence see
Culler (1982, 105).
<21.> Derrida discusses this under the rubric of two well-known topics:
supplementation and diffrance (1982).
<22.> And indeed Derrida is partly reacting against Hegel's idea of an
absolute subject, or absolute spirit.
<23.> This, as Flax observes, does not arise due to the logic of language,
but through a failure of gendered analysis (1990, 214-15). She eloquently
describes how Derrida's system mirrors the exile of women, and all she
represents, from the world of "man," "culture," and "center" (213).
<24.> Hartsock (1987, 186-206; paraphrased and discussed by Di Stefano
(1990).
<25.> For highly articulate critiques of this opposition, see Fuss (1989)
and Schor (1989).
REFERENCES
~~~~~~~~~~
Alcoff, Linda. l988. "Cultural feminism versus post-structuralism: The
identity crisis in feminist theory," //Signs,// 13 (3).
Anzaldua, Gloria. 1987. //Borderlands/la frontera: The new mestiza.//
San Francisco: Spinsters/Aunt Lute.
Bateson, Gregory. 1972. //Steps toward an ecology of mind.// New York:
Ballantine Books.
Beauvoir, Simone de. 1974. //The Second Sex.// Trans. and ed. H. M.
Parshley. New York: Vintage Books.
Buddhaghosa. 1976 (rept). //Path of Purification (Visuddhimagga).// tr.
Bhikkhu Nyanamoli. Berkeley and London: Shambhala.
Butler, Judith. 1990. //Gender trouble: Feminism and the subversion of
identity.// New York: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
Cixous, Hlne and Catherine Clment. 1986. //The Newly Born Woman.//
Trans. by Betsy Wing. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
Cox, Colette. 1992. "Mind and memory." In //In the mirror of memory,// ed.
Janet Gyatso. Albany: State University of New York Press.
Culler, Jonathan. 1982. //On deconstruction.// Ithaca: Cornell University
Press.
Daly, Mary. 1985. //Pure lust: Elemental feminist philosophy.// Boston:
Beacon Press.
de Lauretis, Teresa. 1984. //Alice doesn't.// Bloomington: Indiana
University Press.
Di Stefano, Christine. 1990. "Dilemmas of difference: Feminism, modernity,
and postmodernism." In //Feminism/Postmodernism,// ed. Linda J.
Nicholson. New York and London: Routledge.
Derrida, Jacques. 1976. //Of grammatology.// Trans. Gayatri Chakravorty
Spivak. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
____1978. //Writing and Difference.// Chicago: University of Chicago
Press.
____1981. //Positions.// Trans. and annotated by Alan Bass Chicago:
University of Chicago Press.
____1982. "Diffrance." In //Margins of Philosophy.// Trans. Alan Bass,
Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Do-drup-chen (//rdo grub chen// III, a.k.a. Jig-may-den-ba-nyi-ma ['Jig-
med-bstan-ba'i nyi-ma, 1865-1926]) 1975. //Rig 'dzin yum ka bde chen
rgyal mo'i sgrub gzhung gi zin bris bde chen lam gzang gsal ba'i gron
me (Notes on the Basic Text for Emulating the mother knowledge,
Bearer, the Great Bliss Queen: A lamp clarifying the good path of
great bliss)// in the //Collected Works of Do-drup-chen.// Gantok,
Sikkhim: Do-drup-chen-Rinboche [IV], Vol. 5.
Eisenstein, Hester, and Alice Jardine eds. 1980. //The future of
difference.// Boston: G. K. Hall.
Flax, Jane. 1986. Remembering the selves: Is the repressed gendered?
//Michigan Quarterly Review// 26 (1).
____1980. Mother-daughter relationships: Psychodynamics. In //The future
of difference.// ed. Hester Eisenstein and Alice Jardine. Boston,
Mass: G.K. Hall.
____1990. //Thinking fragments: Psychoanalysis, feminism, and
postmodernism in the contemporary West.// Berkeley: University of
California Press.
Fuss, Diana. 1989. //Essentially Speaking.// London: Routledge and Kegan
Paul.
Gyatso, Janet, ed. 1992. //In the mirror of memory: Reflections on
mindfulness and remembrance in Indian and Tibetan Buddhism.// Albany:
State University of New York Press.
Nancy Hartsock. 1987. "Rethinking modernism: Minority vs. majority
theories." In //Cultural critique// 7,186-206.
Hopkins, Jeffrey. 1983. //Meditation on emptiness.// London: Wisdom
Publications.
Irigaray, Luce. l985. //Speculum of the other woman.// Trans. Gillian C.
Gill. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
Klein, Anne C. 1985a. "Non-Dualism and the Great Bliss Queen." In
//Journal of feminist studies in religion// 1(1).
____1985b. "Primordial purity and everyday life: Exalted female symbols
and the women of Tibet." In //Immaculate and Powerful: The Female in
Sacred Image and Social Reality,// ed. Clarissa Atkinson, Constance
Buchanan, and Margaret Miles. Boston: Beacon Press.
____1986. //Knowledge and liberation: Buddhist epistemology in support of
transformative religious experience.// Ithaca: Snow Lion Press.
____1994. //Meeting the Great Bliss Queen: Buddhists, feminists, and the
art of the self.// Boston: Beacon Press.
Kristeva, Julia. 1981. "Woman can never be defined." In //New French
Feminisms,// ed. Elaine Marks and Isabelle de Courtivron. Amherst:
University of Massachustts Press.
Lessing, Doris. 1980 (rept.) //The four gated city.// New York: Bantam
Books.
Lodr, Geshe Gedun. 1986. //Walking through walls: A presentation of
tibetan meditation.// Trans. and ed. Jeffrey Hopkins; co-edited by
Anne Klein and Leah Zahler. Ithaca: Snow Lion Press.
Marks, Elaine, and Isabelle de Courtivron, eds. 1981. //New French
feminisms.// Amherst: University of Massachustts Press.
Martin, Emily. [1987] 1992. //The Woman in the body: A cultural analysis
of reproduction.// Boston: Beacon Press.
Moraga, Cherie. 1987. //This bridge called my back: Writings by radical
women of color.// New York: Kitchen Table, Women of Color Press.
Napper, Elizabeth. 1980. //Mind in Tibetan Buddhism.// Ithaca: Snow Lion
Press. (rept).
____1989. //Dependent arising and emptiness.// London: Wisdom
Publications.
Ngawang Denzin Dorje (Ngag-dbang-bstan-'dzin-rdo-rje, 18th century). 1972.
//kLong chen snying gi thig le'i mkha' 'gro bde chen rgyal mo'i grub
gzhung gi 'grel pa rgyud don snang ba a.k.a. Ra Tig// (Commentary on
the Practice for Emulating the Sky Woman, the Great Bliss Queen, from
the "Very Essence of the Great Expanse" tradition of Long-chen-rab-
jam). New Delhi: Sonam Topgay Kazi.
Rahula, Walpola. l980. //What the Buddha taught.// New York: Grove Press.
Rorty, Richard. 1986. "Freud and moral reflection." In //Pragmatism's
Freud: The moral disposition of psychoanalysis,// ed. Joseph H. Smith
and William Kerrigan. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
Schor, Naomi. 1989. "This essentialism which is not one: Coming to grips
with Irigaray." In //Differences// 1(2).
Smith, Paul. 1988. //Discerning the subject.// Minneapolis: University of
Minnesota Press.
Thera, Nyanaponika. 1984. //Heart of Buddhist meditation.// New York:
Samuel Weiser.
Walker, Alice. 1982. //The color purple.// New York: Harcourt Brace
Jovanovich.
Weedon, Chris. 1987. //Feminist practice and poststructuralist theory.//
Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
* * * * *
This article appears by permission of //Hypatia// and will appear in
volume 9(4), Fall, 1994, Special Issue on Feminist Philosophy of Religion.
ANNE C. KLEIN is an Associate Professor at Rice University, where she
teaches in the Department of Religious Studies and in the
interdisciplinary Women's Studies major. She also offers occasional
workshops bringing meditation practice to bear on contemporary women's
issues. In 1982-83 she was a Research Associate and Lecturer in the Women
and Religion Program at Harvard Divinity School. In addition to a number
of articles in the area of women and Buddhism, she has published three
books on issues in Buddhist philosophy and epistemology. //Meeting the
Great Bliss Queen: Buddhists, Feminists, and the Art of the Self// is her
first booklength work on Buddhism and feminism.
=======================================================================
{11} PRACTICE
=======================================================================
THE SIGNIFICANCE OF ORDINATION AS A BUDDHIST NUN
by Sister Ayya Khema
To be ordained as a Buddhist nun is such a major step in a woman's life
that one should be well aware of its significance before undertaking it.
Up to the moment of ordination, one can, of course, have no idea what
being a nun entails, since only lay status has been experienced.
Naturally, one will have expectations, hopes, and views, most of which may
have to be rectified as one goes along.
One could compare it to getting married; not having known beforehand what
it means to be a married woman, many unrealistic ideas are entertained.
Because of a strong commitment of love and togetherness, however, one
takes the step, regardless of fears and anxieties. Then, as years go by,
if love, commitment, understanding, and devotion wane, the marriage
suffers, deteriorates, and eventually collapses.
The same applies to becoming and remaining a nun. While at first there may
be a flush of excitement and anticipation, if love, devotion, commitment,
and understanding are not constantly cultivated until they become
intrinsic qualities in one's heart, the nun status will not flourish and
will eventually disintegrate, either into disappointments and
dissatisfactions or a return to lay life.
There is a significant difference between being a laywoman and being a
nun, however, which has great meaning for those who are ordained. I am not
talking about status or importance within the community. I am speaking
about my own experience, having been a practicing laywoman in the past,
and then having become a nun.
It is a matter of priority and commitment. When one practices as a
laywoman, one can certainly meditate, live according to the precepts, and
practice generosity. One can do many things, but one's daily life is beset
with so many other duties and responsibilities that very often, as I have
experienced myself, practice comes last. There are only so many hours in a
day, and everyone does have to sleep and eat and clean up and wash. And
there are so many other items of importance that seem to beset one's mind
and also one's time, that the energy allotted for practice becomes minute.
When the time comes that one can see clearly that there is nothing more
important to do than to practice the path of the Buddha in order to
eliminate //dukkha// (suffering) forever, then comes the moment when
ordination seems to be the only possible step. That certainly does not
mean that all //dukkha// is eliminated, but it does mean that one should
have clearly in mind that the priority, the main objective of daily
activity, now is the practice of //Dhamma//. If that is clearly in mind,
one must also be careful not to use one's time in a way which will
interfere with that priority. In Pali, we call that //samvega//,
"urgency": to remember every single day why we have put on these robes,
namely, to practice.
It is also important to determine what it means to practice. In the
Theravada tradition, we say it consists of two things -- study and
meditation. When we see, for instance, that these are the two most
important things to do, that does not mean tat we do not sleep at night,
eat our meals, or wash our clothes. There are, of course, situations where
food needs to be cooked, pathways have to be swept, floors have to be
cleaned. We often find women saying, "This is not //Dhamma// work." They
only want to do //Dhamma// work. That is a mistaken view. If we practice,
then we can do //Dhamma// work in every activity, yet we must not allow
the activities to become so overwhelming that we do not have time for
study and meditation.
So it means a balancing act, which is often found to be very difficult to
maintain. That is why, in the beginning of one's practice as a nun, one
needs an experienced teacher to tell one what to do and to follow this
instruction with humility.
There is another aspect to being ordained as a nun, namely, to become a
professional at it. Wearing the robes should not be wearing some special
costume, but it should be a declaration of being a servant to humanity. In
our tradition it is //anatta// (non-self). We are not trying to be
something. We are trying to become "selfless." So in the last essence,
wearing the robes means that one is proclaiming the fact that one is
trying to become absolutely nobody.
There are many obstacles in the way, as we all know. One great obstacle is
being a teacher! People either love you and think you are wonderful or
hate you and think that you are terrible. Another obstacle is building
monasteries. Another obstacle is going on trips. And the greatest obstacle
of all is the mind itself. But never mind, obstacles are to be overcome.
The only thing that counts is that we know why we are wearing the robes
and that we know what we are doing while we are wearing them.
I have often thought of women in robes as //Dhamma// warriors. A
successful army has to have the best weapons. What are the most important
weapons that this army of //Dhamma// can possibly carry? It is a female
prerogative, and sometimes also a female difficulty, that we deal very
frequently with our emotions. These emotions can be purified to become
real //metta//, "loving kindness," that the Lord Buddha spoke about. This
//metta// is the most useful and effective weapon that we can have.
The world that we know, the world that we live in, has an enormous amount
of fear, hatred, unhappiness, anxiety, and animosity between people. If we
want to be true disciples of the Buddha, then it is our privilege to
develop within our own hearts that love which is totally non-
discriminating. Most people in the world are looking for someone to love
them. It is our privilege to learn that this is not meaningful, but that
developing loving kindness within our own heart and going out to others
with it is the real practice.
Why should one not be able to do that as a laywoman? No reason at all,
except that one's own family is always there to grasp at and be attached
to. Wearing the robes is the first step of a renunciation process which
can and will one day end in //nibbana// (liberation). Living as a nun in a
nunnery, one's own family becomes part of the whole of humanity. So that
is one step in the renunciation of one's grasping and attachment. By not
being attached in that way, we have the possibility of an expansion of the
heart toward all beings, not because they need love, want to be loved, are
lovable or otherwise, but because the heart can do nothing else. This
practice can be the first step of our renunciation. After having renounced
our hair, our clothes, our jewelry, our belongings, the next step is the
renunciation of that attachment which especially women know -- the
attachment to their near and dear ones.
These robes have been called the banner of the //arahants// (liberated
ones). Even though we may not all be //arahants//, we are flying their
banner. That is one part of making a nun a professional and not an amateur
-- realizing that we are flying this banner. Another aspect of being a
professional, rather than an amateur, is knowing. Knowing here means
knowledge -- the knowledge of one's own tradition, its history, its
implication, and its practice. And the most important aspect is then
transferring that knowledge into wisdom. To transfer knowledge into wisdom
means to practice through the meditative path, and to experience with the
heart that which one knows with the head. I call that "the understood
experience."
When we practice in such a way, we find that we, in ourselves, can prove
Lord Buddha's words correct. Then comes the time when we can actually
//be// the //Dhamma//, rather than simply reading or listening to the
//Dhamma//.
So the main difference between wearing ordinary clothes and wearing the
robes of a nun is that the greatest priority, the total aspiration, is the
//Dhamma// within oneself. Lord Buddha said, "Who sees me sees the
//Dhamma//, who sees //Dhamma// sees me." This seeing is the inner vision
of the //Dhamma//, which is a different reality from what we live in
ordinary life. To see that different reality, to listen to a different
drummer, gives life a far more profound stability and depth.
Much of the value of being a nun lies in the example given to other women
of a female independent of the approval or the empowerment of males, being
instead totally imbued with spiritual aspirations. If a nun finds peace
and happiness in her vocation and is able to impart some of that to
others, her contribution towards a better humanity becomes of the greatest
value and can, in fact, change the quality of life amongst many people.
* * * * *
Excerpted from //Sakyadhita: Daughters of the Buddha//, edited by Karma
Lekshe Tsomo. Copyright 1988. Reprinted with permission of Snow Lion
Publications, Inc., PO Box 6483, Ithaca NY 14851.
SISTER AYYA KHEMA was born in Berlin in 1923. In 1949 she became an
American citizen, married and had two children. She migrated to Australia
in 1964, then travelled to Burma and Thailand to study Buddhism, later
continuing her study in the U.S. and Australia. She co-founded Wat Buddha
Dhamma, a monastery in the Theravada tradition in Sydney in 1978, and a
year later was ordained as a nun. In Colombo she set up the International
Women's Centre as a training centre for Sri Lankan nuns and Parappuduwa
Nuns' Island for women of all nationalities who want to live a monastic
life temporarily or permanently. In February of 1987, Ayya Khema
coordinated and spoke at the first International Conference of Buddhist
Nuns in Bodh Gaya, India, at which the Dalai Lama gave the keynode
address. In May of 1987, she was invited as a lecturer at the United
Nations Staff Recreation Council in New York, the first Buddhist speaker
ever to have addressed the U.N. In 1989 Sister Ayya Khema established
Buddha Haus in South Germany, where she is currently its spiritual
director.
=======================================================================
{12} CALENDAR:
=======================================================================
=======================================================================
BUDDHIST MEDITATION RETREATS & EVENTS CALENDAR
=======================================================================
AUGUST
=======================================================================
DharmaNet International revised: 8/2/94
=======================================================================
5/29-8/28 SUMMER ANGO (PEACEFUL DWELLING) RETREAT - Taizan Maezumi.
Attend all or part. Zen Mountain Center, PO Box 43, Mountain Center CA
92561. (909) 659-5272.
1-3 8th EUROPEAN SHIN CONFERENCE
Vienna. Contact: Mrs. Simone Zotz (Shin Conference), Hauptstrasse 27, A-
7372, Weingraben, Austria.
2-21 SUMMER KYOL CHE - Zen Master Su Bong.
Providence Zen Center, 99 Pound Road, Cumberland RI 02864. (401) 658-1464.
Fax: (401) 658-1188. Internet: kwanumzen@aol.com
4-9 FAMILY RETREAT - Christina Feldman.
Insight Meditation Society, Pleasant St, Barre MA 01005. (508) 355-4378.
5-7 WEEKEND RETREAT - Bhante Gunaratana or Bhante Rahula.
Bhavana Society, Rt 1 Box 218-3, High View WV 26808. (304) 856-2341.
5-13 8-DAY ZEN RETREAT - Yvonne Rand.
Goat-in-the-Road, Muir Beach CA. Contact: Yvonne Rand, 1821 Star Route,
Sausalito CA 94965. (415) 388-5572. Fax: (415) 388-9615.
5-14 VIPASSANA RETREAT - Gil Fronsdal, Mary Orr, John Travis.
Santa Cruz CA. Contact: Eileen Phillips, 2911 Gwendolyn Way, Rancho
Cordova CA 95670. (916) 361-7128.
5-14 VIPASSANA RETREAT - Steven Smith & Michele McDonald-Smith.
Sante Fe NM. Contact: Nancy Shonk, 2502 Alamosa Dr, Sante Fe NM 87505.
(505) 471-0422.
6-12 INSIGHT & OPENING: THE POWER OF THE BREATH & MEDITATION - Stan Grof
& Jack Kornfield. Bennington VT. Contact: David Carr, (707) 895-2856.
7-10 7-DAY SESSHIN - Abbot Tenshin Reb Anderson.
Green Gulch Farm Zen Center, 1601 Shoreline Hwy, Sausalito CA 94965. (415)
383-3134. Fax: (415) 383-3128.
7-27 METTA & VIPASSANA RETREAT - Joseph Goldstein, Sharon Salzberg, Fred
von Allmen. Mannenbach, TG, Switzerland. Contact: Dhamma Gruppe, Postfach
5909, CH-3001 Bern.
9-14 THE ZEN GARDEN - Stephen Morrell.
Zen Mountain Monastery, Box 197MR, Mt. Tremper NY 12457. (914) 688-2228.
12-19 KALACHAKRA RETREAT.
Open only to those who have taken the Kalachakra initiation. Namgyal
Monastery, PO Box 127, Ithaca NY 14851. (607) 273-0739.
12-21 INSIGHT MEDITATION & INQUIRY - Christopher Titmuss, Sharda Rogell,
& Jose Reissig. Insight Meditation Society, Pleasant St, Barre MA 01005.
(508) 355-4378.
12-21 EXPLORING THE WAY OF DEVOTION - Kittisaro & Mary Weinberg.
Gaia House, Woodland Rd, Denbury, Nr. Newton Abbot, Devon TQ12 6DY,
England. Tel: Ipplepen (0803) 813188.
12-21 VIPASSANA RETREAT - Ruth Denison & A. Zinser.
Germany. Contact: Waldhaus am Laachersee, D-56643 Nickenich, Germany.
17-21 ZEN ARTS INTENSIVE - Clark Strand, Marcia Shibata, Joan Yushin.
Zen Mountain Monastery, Box 197MR, Mt. Tremper NY 12457. (914) 688-2228.
18-21 HIGH SCHOOL & COLLEGE STUDENTS' RETREAT - Bhante Gunaratana or
Bhante Rahula. Bhavana Society, Rt 1 Box 218-3, High View WV 26808.
Contact: Dr. Arvoranee Pinit, (410) 744-9295.
19-20 MINDFULNESS RETREAT - Khan Le Van.
Near Sydney Australia. Contact: Lotus Bud Sangha, 83 Queen St, Ashfield
NSW 2131. Tel: (02) 798-4056.
19-21 WISDOM MEETING WISDOM: A ZEN MEDITATION RETREAT FOR THOSE 55 AND
OLDER - Pat Leonetti & Lee de Barros. Green Gulch Farm Zen Center, 1601
Shoreline Hwy, Sausalito CA 94965. (415) 383-3134. Fax: (415) 383-3128.
19-28 VIPASSANA RETREAT - Michele McDonald-Smith & Steven Smith.
Cloud Mountain Retreat Center, 311 W. McGraw, Seattle WA 98119. (206)
286-9060.
19-28 ALASKA WILDERNESS RETREAT: VIPASSANA & DEEP ECOLOGY - Christopher
Reed & Michele Benzamin-Masuda. Contact: Ordinary Dharma, 247 Horizon Av,
Venice CA 90291. (310) 396-5054. In Alaska, call: (907) 463-5019 or 789-
0140.
20 FAMILY DAY OF MINDFULNESS - Wendy Johnson.
Green Gulch Farm Zen Center, 1601 Shoreline Hwy, Sausalito CA 94965. (415)
383-3134.
20 FOUR FOUNDATIONS OF MINDFULNESS #1 - Gil Fronsdal.
Spirit Rock Meditation Center, Box 909, Woodacre CA 94973. (415) 488-0164.
20-21 YONG MAENG JONG JIN RETREAT.
Cambridge Zen Center, 199 Auburn St, Cambridge MA 02139. (617) 576-3229.
22-27 MEDITATION RETREAT FOR WOMEN - Sylvia Wetzel.
Hartlisberg, BE, Switzerland. Contact: Dhamma Gruppe, Postfach 5909, CH-
3001 Bern.
22-28 SESSHIN - John Daido Loori.
Zen Mountain Monastery, Box 197MR, Mt. Tremper NY 12457. (914) 688-2228.
23-25 TRANSFORMING ANGER: NIGHTLY DHARMA TALKS - Ven. George Churinoff.
Land of Medicine Buddha, 5800 Prescott Rd, Soquel CA 95073. (408) 462-
8383.
24-25 DO I ACCEPT MYSELF? - Christopher Titmuss & Sharda Rogell.
Spirit Rock Meditation Center, Box 909, Woodacre CA 94973. (415) 488-0164.
26-28 VIPASSANA DAYLONG - Gil Fronsdal.
Los Gatos CA. Contact: Leelane Hines, (415) 968-2887.
26-28 YAMANTAKA AND PALDEN LHAMO INITIATIONS - Geshe Lobsang Tsephel.
Vajrapani Institute, PO Box I, Boulder Creek CA 95006. (408) 338-6654.
26-31 YOGA & INSIGHT MEDITATION - Dan Lupton & Yanai Postelnik.
Gaia House, Woodland Rd, Denbury, Nr. Newton Abbot, Devon TQ12 6DY,
England. Tel: Ipplepen (0803) 813188.
26-9/2 INSIGHT MEDITATION & INQUIRY - Christopher Titmuss & Sharda
Rogell. Santa Rosa CA. Contact: Janet Hewins, 173C Parnassus, San
Francisco CA 94122. (415) 759-6461.
27 MEN'S RETREAT DAY - Jack Kornfield, Robert Hall & Wes Nisker.
Spirit Rock Meditation Center, Box 909, Woodacre CA 94973. (415) 488-0164.
27 LIVING WITH DYING: A DAY OF CARING FOR THE CAREGIVERS - Furyu Nancy
Schroeder & Grace Damman. Green Gulch Farm Zen Center, 1601 Shoreline Hwy,
Sausalito CA 94965. (415) 383-3134. Fax: (415) 383-3128.
=======================================================================
SEPTEMBER
=======================================================================
28-10/5 MAHAMUDRA RETREAT - Ven. Khenpo Tsultrim Gyamtso.
Rigpe Dorje Center, PO Box 690995, San Antonio TX 78269. (212) 698-0529.
2-5 LABOR DAY INSIGHT WEEKEND - Christopher Titmuss & Sharda Rogell.
Santa Rosa CA. Contact: Janet Hewins, 173C Parnassus, San Francisco CA
94122. (415) 759-6461.
2-5 LABOR DAY WEEKEND VIPASSANA RETREAT - Rodney Smith.
Cloud Mountain Retreat Center, 311 W. McGraw, Seattle WA 98119. (206)
286-9060.
2-5 MINDFULNESS RETREAT - Anh Huong Nguyen.
Claymont Court, WV. Contact: Anh Huong, (703) 938-9606.
2-5 LABOR DAY SESSHIN - Hawaii Diamond Sangha.
Palolo Zen Center, 2747 Waiomao Road, Honolulu HI 96816. (808) 735-1347.
2-5 LABOR DAY SESSHIN - Sanbo Kyodan tradition.
Maria Kannon Zen Center, 7422 Villanova St., Dallas TX 95225. (214) 360-
0595. Contact: Dawne Schomer, (214) 414-8637.
2-5, 2-11 VIPASSANA RETREAT - Ruth Denison.
Insight Meditation Society, Pleasant St, Barre MA 01005. (508) 355-4378.
2-8 LAM.RIM RETREAT - Kirti Tsenshab Rinpoche and Robina Courtin.
Vajrapani Institute, PO Box I, Boulder Creek CA 95006. (408) 338-6654.
9-11 VIPASSANA RETREAT - Kamala Masters & Steven Smith.
HI. Contact: Yuklin Aluli, 415C Uluniu St, Kailua HI 96734. FAX: (808)
262-5610.
9-11 MINDFULNESS RETREAT - Jack Lawlor.
Spring Green WI. Contact: Lakeside Buddha Sangha, PO Box 7067, Evanston IL
60201. (708) 475-0080.
9-11 KALACHAKRA INITIATION - Kirti Tsenshab Rinpoche.
Vajrapani Institute, PO Box I, Boulder Creek CA 95006. (408) 338-6654.
9-18 VIPASSANA RETREAT - Ajahn Sumedho.
Amaravati Buddhist Centre, Great Gaddesden, Hemel Hempstead, Herfordshire
HP1 3BZ, England. Tel: Intl. code + 44 44284-3239; in UK: 044284-3239.
10 WRESTLING WITH THE ANGEL: WHERE MIND AND SPIRIT MEET - Jack Kornfield,
Joanna Macy, Ram Dass, Jennifer Welwood, John Welwood, Jai Uttal. A
special benefit. Contact: The Living/Dying Project, 20 Sunnyside Avenue,
Suite A243, Mill Valley CA 94941. (415) 332-2033.
11 FOUR FOUNDATIONS OF MINDFULNESS #2 - Gil Fronsdal.
Spirit Rock Meditation Center, Box 909, Woodacre CA 94973. (415) 488-0164.
11-14 VIPASSANA RETREAT - Christopher Reed & Michele Benzamin-Masuda.
Ordinary Dharma, 247 Horizon Av, Venice CA 90291. (310) 396-5054.
12 NUMATA LECTURE: The Development of American Buddhism: Two Overviews -
Professor Charles Prebish. Institute of Buddhist Studies, 1900 Addison
Street, Berkeley CA 94704. (510) 849-2383. Fax: (510) 849-2158. Free.
15-18 VIPASSANA RETREAT - Shinzen Young & Shirley Fenton.
Encino CA. Contact: Vipassana Support Insitute, 4070 Albright Av, Los
Angeles CA 90066. (310) 915-1943.
16-18 THE JATAKA TALES - Rafe Martin.
Zen Mountain Monastery, Box 197MR, Mt. Tremper NY 12457. (914) 688-2228.
16-19 VIPASSANA RESIDENTIAL RETREAT - Mary Orr.
Contact: Joy Fox, 147 East Spring, Fayetteville AK 72701. (501) 444-
6005.
16-26 WILDERNESS FAST: PRACTICING ECOPSYCHOLOGY - Joan Halifax.
Upaya, 1404 Cerro Gordo Rd, Santa Fe NM 87501. (505) 986-8518. Fax: (505)
986-8528.
17 VIPASSANA DAYLONG - James Baraz.
Spirit Rock Meditation Center, Box 909, Woodacre CA 94973. (415) 488-0164.
19 NUMATA LECTURE - Rick Fields. Institute of Buddhist Studies, 1900
Addison Street, Berkeley CA 94704. (510) 849-2383. Fax: (510) 849-2158.
19-25 SESSHIN - John Daido Loori.
Zen Mountain Monastery, Box 197MR, Mt. Tremper NY 12457. (914) 688-2228.
21-11/3 PARTIAL #1 RETREAT - Joseph Goldstein, Carol Wilson, Steven
Smith, Michele McDonald-Smith, Steven Armstrong. Prerquisite is one 9-day
retreat with an IMS teacher or special permission. Insight Meditation
Society, Pleasant St, Barre MA 01005. (508) 355-4378.
21-12/17 THREE MONTH RETREAT - Joseph Goldstein, Carol Wilson, Steven
Smith, Michele McDonald-Smith, Steven Armstrong. Prerquisite is one 9-day
retreat with an IMS teacher or special permission. Insight Meditation
Society, Pleasant St, Barre MA 01005. (508) 355-4378.
23-25 WEEKEND RETREAT FOR LESBIANS & GAY MEN - Arinna Weisman & Eric
Kolvig. Dhamma Dena, HC-1, Box 250, Joshua Tree CA 92252. (619) 362-
4815.
23-10/2 NINE-DAY VIPASSANA RETREAT - Rosemary & Steve Weissman.
Cloud Mountain Retreat Center, 311 W. McGraw, Seattle WA 98119. (206)
286-9060.
24 WOMEN'S VIPASSANA DAY - Julie Wester.
Spirit Rock Meditation Center, Box 909, Woodacre CA 94973. (415) 488-0164.
25 DAY OF FORGIVENESS PRACTICE - Anna Douglas.
Spirit Rock Meditation Center, Box 909, Woodacre CA 94973. (415) 488-0164.
25-28 VIPASSANA RETREAT - Mary Orr.
Watsonville CA. Contact: Mt. Madonna Center, (408) 847-0406.
26 NUMATA LECTURE: Visible and Invisible: Buddhism in America -
Professor Jan Nattier. Institute of Buddhist Studies, 1900 Addison Street,
Berkeley CA 94704. (510) 849-2383. Fax: (510) 849-2158. Free.
30-10/2 VIPASSANA RETREAT - Gil Fronsdal.
Grand Forks ND. Contact: Sr. Brigid, Koinonia Spirituality Center, 2801
Olson Dr, Grand Forks ND 58201. (701) 772-4607.
* * * * *
This calendar is updated as new material comes in. The latest version is
online at Dharma Electronic Files Archive (DEFA) and may be accessed via
anonymous ftp to ftp.netcom.com (directory: pub/dharma/Buddhism/Resources)
or via WWW (//ftp.netcom.com/pub/dharma/defa-home.html). It is posted at
the beginning of the month in the Dharmanet conference SANGHA and the
Internet mailing list BUDDHIST. It also is published in the e-journal
//Gassho// (subscribe to: dharma@netcom.com).
Please report additions, changes and deletions to DharmaNet International,
P.O. Box 4951, Berkeley CA 94704-4951. E-mail: dharma@netcom.com
=======================================================================
{13} REVIEWS:
=======================================================================
[No reviews submitted this issue. Individuals interested in reviewing
books, please contact Barry Kapke .]
Books Received:
//The Edicts of King Asoka: An English Rendering//. Ven. S. Dhammika. 40
pages; paperback. ISBN 955-24-0104-6. Wheel Publication no. 386/387.
Buddhist Publication Society, PO Box 61, 54 Sangharaja Mawatha, Kandy SRI
LANKA. 1993.
//Reading the Mind: Advice for Meditators//. Tan Acharn Kor Khao-suan-
luang. 48 pages; paperback. ISBN 955-24-0105-4. Wheel Publication no.
388/389. Buddhist Publication Society, PO Box 61, 54 Sangharaja Mawatha,
Kandy SRI LANKA. 1993.
//The Lion's Roar: Two Discourses of the Buddha//. Edited by Bhikkhu
Bodhi; translated from the Pali by Bhikkhu Nanamoli. 48 pages; paperback.
ISBN 955-24-0115-1. Wheel Publication no. 390/391. Buddhist Publication
Society, PO Box 61, 54 Sangharaja Mawatha, Kandy SRI LANKA. 1993.
//The Sutra on Upasaka Precepts//. Translated from the Chinese of
Dharmaraksha (Taisho, Vol. 24 No. 1488) by Bhiksuni Shih Heng-ching. BDK
English Tripitaka 45-II. 240 pages; hardback. ISBN 0-9625618-5-1. Numata
Center for Buddhist Translation and Research, 2620 Warring Street,
Berkeley CA 9404. 1994.
//Dharma Family Treasures: Sharing Mindfulness With Children//. Edited and
illustrated by Sandy Eastoak. 304 pages; paperback. ISBN 1-55643-172-4.
North Atlantic Books, PO Box 12327, Berkeley CA 94701-9998. 1994.
//Thank You and OK!: An American Zen Failure in Japan//. David Chadwick.
480 pages; paperback. ISBN 0-14-019457-6. Penguin/Arkana, 375 Hudson
Street, NY, NY 10014. 1994.
//Encountering God: A Spiritual Journey from Bozeman to Banaras//. Diana
L. Eck. 276 pages; paperback. ISBN 0-8070-7303-2. Beacon Press, 25 Beacon
Street, Boston MA 02108. 1994.
=======================================================================
{14} RESOURCES:
=======================================================================
The following is a sampling of "electronic books" that are published by
DharmaNet International and are available for free distribution. These are
available via anonymous ftp from Dharma Electronic Files Archive (DEFA),
the online Buddhist library maintained by DI, or from participating
DharmaNet BBS sites (see the list at the end of this issue). DEFA may be
accessed at:
ftp.netcom.com:pub/dharma
sunsite.unc.edu:pub/academic/religious_studies/Buddhism/DEFA
ftp.nectec.or.th:pub/mirrors/dharma
etext.archive.umich.edu:/Religious.Texts/DharmaNet
Books by Women
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
All of Us: 12 Talks by Sister Khema (ALLOFUS.ZIP)
Meditating on No-self, by Sister Khema (BODHI095.ZIP)
Emotion: Working with Anger, by Michele McDonald (MCDONALD.ZIP)
Condensed Breath Meditation, by K. Khao Suan-luang (CONDENSE.ZIP)
Here and Now, by Sister Khema (Forthcoming)
Little Dust in Our Eyes, by Sister Khema (Forthcoming)
Pride & Conceit, by Elizabeth Ashby and B. Fawcett (BODHI014.ZIP)
One Foot in the World: Buddhist Approaches to Present-day Problems,
by Lily de Silva (WHEEL337.ZIP)
Radical Therapy, by Lily de Silva (Forthcoming)
Reading the Mind, by K. Khao Suan-luang (Forthcoming)
Teisho: Beginning Anew, by Sister Annabel Laity (LAITY_92.ZIP)
Teisho: The Pools, by Charlotte Joko Beck (BECKPOOL.ZIP)
The Buddha's Way & Abortion, by Yvonne Rand (JIZO.ZIP)
Books About Women in Buddhism
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Inspiration from Enlightened Nuns, by Susan Elbaum Jootla (WHEEL349.ZIP)
Buddhist Women at the Time of the Buddha, by Hellmuth Hecker
(WHEEL292.ZIP)
The Position of Women in Buddhism, by Dr. (Mrs.) LS Dewaraja
(WHEEL280.ZIP)
The DharmaNet File Distribution Network and the Dharma Electronic File
Archive (DEFA) will not distribute files without permission to do so from
the author and/or publisher. (See the Electronic Distribution Agreement
accompanying each file.) If you are the author/publisher of Buddhist texts
that you would like to see added to these online libraries, please contact
Barry Kapke at DharmaNet International, PO Box 4951, Berkeley CA 94704 or
by e-mail at dharma@netcom.com MAY THESE RESOURCES BENEFIT ALL BEINGS!
=======================================================================
{15} SANGHA:
=======================================================================
-------------------------------------------
SF Bay Area Directory
of
Buddhist Monasteries, Lay Practice Centers,
and Organizations
-------------------------------------------
Pure Land
~~~~~~~~~
Berkeley Buddhist Temple
2121 Channing Way, Berkeley CA 94704
Voice: 510-841-1356
Buddhist Church of Oakland
825 Jackson, Oakland CA
Voice: 510-832-5988
Buddhist Church of San Francisco
1881 Pine St, San Francisco CA 94109
Voice: 415-776-3158
Buddhist Churches of America (Jodo Shinshu)
1710 Octavia, San Francisco CA
Voice: 415-776-5600 FAX: 415-771-6293
Buddhist Temple of Alameda
2325 Pacific Av, Alameda CA
Voice: 510-522-5243
Institute of Buddhist Studies
1900 Addison Street, Berkeley CA 94704
Voice: 510-849-2383 FAX: 510-849-2158
Theravada
~~~~~~~~~
Buddha Sasana Foundation
45 Oak Road, Larkspur CA 94939
Voice: 510-381-6905
California Buddhist Vihara Society
4797 Myrtle Drive, Concord CA 94521
Voice: 510-845-4843
California Vipassana Center
PO Box 510, Occidental CA 95465
Voice: 707-874-3031
Dhammachakka Meditation Center
Box 206, 2124 Kittredge Street, Berkeley CA 94702
Voice: 510-531-1691
International Meditation Center-USA
Contact: Linda H. Kemp-Combes
1331 33rd Avenue, San Francisco CA 94122
Nama-Rupa
10 Arbor Street, San Francisco CA 94131
Voice: 415-334-4921
Spirit Rock Meditation Center
P.O. Box 909, Woodacre CA 94973
Voice: 415-488-0164 FAX: 415-488-0170
Taungpulu Kaba-Aye Monastery
18335 Big Basin Way, Boulder Creek CA 95006
Voice: 408-338-4050
Theravada Buddhist Society of America
68 Woodrow Street, Daly City CA 94014
Voice: 415-994-8272
Wat Buddhanusorn
36054 Niles Blvd., Fremont CA 94536-1563
Voice: 510-790-2294 or 510-790-2296
Wat Nagara Dhamma (Wat Nakorntham)
3225 Lincoln Way, San Francisco CA 94122
Voice: 415-665-7566
Wat Mongkolratanaram
1911 Russell Street, Berkeley CA 94703
Voice: 510-849-3419 or 510-540-9734
Tibetan/Vajrayana/Dzogchen
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Ati Ling
PO Box 90, Oakville CA 94562
Voice: 707-255-7172
Dharmadhatu - San Francisco
1630 Taraval, San Francisco CA 94116
Voice: 415-731-4426
Dharmadhatu - Berkeley
2288 Fulton, Berkeley CA 94704
Voice: 510-841-3242
Dharmadhatu - Palo Alto
201 N. Covington Road, #2, Los Altos CA 94022
Voice: 415-949-3082
Dudjom International Foundation
PO Box 40155, Berkeley CA 94704-0155
Voice: 510-849-9928
Kagyu Droden Kunchab
1892 Fell Street, San Francisco CA 94117
Voice: 415-752-5454
Kamtsang Choling, USA
Voice: 415-661-6467
Karma Jigme Ling
33 Marne Street, San Francisco CA 94127
Voice: 415-661-6467
Land of Medicine Buddha
5800 Prescott Road, Soquel CA 95073
Voice: 408-462-8383 FAX: 408-462-8380
Maitreya Institute
3315 Sacramento Street, Suite 622, San Francisco CA 94118
Voice: 415-668-5920
Nyingma Institute
1815 Highland Place, Berkeley CA 94709
Voice: 510-843-6812
EOF
From tyagi@HouseofKaos.Abyss.com Fri Nov 11 04:38:37 1994
From: tyagi mordred nagasiva
Subject: buddhism.sem.txt
To: ceci@lysator.liu.se (Ceci Henningsson)
Date: Thu, 10 Nov 1994 19:38:01 -0800 (PST)
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL0]
Content-Type: text
Content-Length: 13365
To: alt.zen
From: gary.ray@tigerteam.org (Gary Ray)
Subject: Prerequisites to Spiritual Practice
Date: 49941108
Prerequisites to Spiritual Practice
By: Stephen Echard-Musgrave Roshi
FROM: Magical Blend, Jan-Apr 1990
Every teacher has problem students. There is not a Zen
center, ashram, church or temple that does not have a few members
who have an unusually hard time adapting to their practice and to
fellow students. The problem seems to be that most of these people
are not properly prepared to begin spiritual discipline. They
expect the discipline to provide them with on-the-job training in
emotional maturity.
Unfortunately, no matter how compassionate the teacher may be,
he or she cannot devote the extraordinary amount of time and energy
needed to parent a student to maturity. And, if it is a problem
for the teacher to find the right student, it is equally difficult
for the student to find the right teacher and tradition. There is
much in this society that leads one away from the path of wisdom
and into inappropriate ways of living,and some of these diversions
can be mistaken for the path itself. Confronted with all this, it
is easy to become confused. Sometimes the journey appears to be an
endless labyrinth composed of countless potential paths.
While I cannot lay out a simple road map for the spiritual
search, there are certain guidelines and tools which might help
someone in beginning a spiritual journey. First, spiritual seekers
must develop a working knowledge of their own personality. They
must understand their own spiritual history and how it affects
their actions both consciously and unconsciously. to do this, one
has to be honest, capable of self-analysis, and willing to take the
perilous journey of psychic discovery.
Because the power of the unconscious is formidable, a guide is
highly recommended, but should one feel confident enough to
undertake this journey without professional support, a trusted
friend may be chosen as a guide. It is important, however, that
this friend should not have a natural agenda towards the student,
such as a parent, lover or spouse does. Also helpful are such
techniques as dream analysis, journal therapy, or some other form
of self-analysis because spiritual exercises, like physical
exercises, is best preceded by a short period of preparation or
warm-up to achieve maximum benefits. In circumstances where the
spiritual practice to be engaged in is particularly rigorous, such
as ritual magic, Zen or Tibetan Buddhism, it is better to use a
professional who is well-versed in the discipline of psychological
analysis.
In undergoing the process of self-analysis, it is important
that we try to remove ourselves from excessive attachment to
emotion and emotive states. The goal of the process is not to get
ourselves in touch with feelings, but to free ourselves from those
feelings.
Personal feelings are different from emotions. Emotions are
natural responses to primary situations. Personal feelings are
secondary responses attached to both conceptual and emotional
frameworks that interfere with our self-understanding, darkening
the path of self-understanding instead of illuminating it. Whereas
emotion involves an organic, instantaneous, natural response to
stimuli, personal feeling is a complex of emotional memory that
does not allow for intermediate response to the moment without
referencing its own complete matrix. Freeing oneself of personal
feelings allows a simpler, more direct emotional relationship to
life. When emotion is no longer interrupted in the present by
patterns of the past, we are free to experience our life in an
organic way instead of through the bondage of pathological
conditioning. This does not mean that we cripple our memory; we
are still capable of recapturing past emotions. It is simply that
these past emotions are no longer able to disrupt our life through
creating negative patterns of conditioning.
The only way one can accomplish this liberation is through the
systematic unearthing of these emotive patterns. This must be done
in a controlled environment that helps to separate emotions from
the conceptual framework in which they reside. And since what we
are doing is defusing our memory; we should take the same care as
if we were on a bomb squad, because if we try this without the
proper preparation and diligence it will have the same explosive
result.
Only after one has gained a reasonable level of maturity is it
time to take up the challenge of the deeper spiritual paths. This
does not mean we cannot begin the preliminary spiritual practices
involving correct moral action, devotion, mindfulness, etc. It is
simply that we proceed cautiously into those disciplines whose
practice involves direct confrontation with our view of self when
that self is still fragile for us.
How can we know if we have reached a sufficient level of ego
development to attempt a path of self-transcendence? There are
certain key questions that one can ask oneself, the answers to
which are indicative of maturity level. The questions of
importance are:
1. Are you easily offended? Do situations or people that
you disagree with make you feel threatened or angry?
2. Are you easily bored? Do you have trouble simply being
without the presence of an underlying level of
discontent?
3. Do you lack discipline? Do you find it impossible to set
realistic goals and achieve them?
4. Do you lack direction? Do you have problems figuring out
what it is that you should be doing in your life?
5. Do you love potential and disregard actuality? Do you
live in a world of daydreams and fantasy, and ponder deep
metaphysical subjects at the expense of everyday "taking
care of business?"
6. Are you unable to accept the dark side of life? Do
death, disease and violence completely "throw you for a
loop?" Do you assiduously avoid any contact with them?
If you find that you have problems in several of these areas
severe enough to interfere with the quality of your life, then you
should reconsider whether you are ready to undergo a serious
spiritual discipline. Perhaps it would be wiser to start with a
psychological discipline such as Jungian analysis or journal
therapy, to get the requisite support necessary to master the small
self while pursuing the larger self in spiritual practice.
The next step in development is choosing the path that one
will follow. The knowledge gained in self-introspection and/or
therapy should be used as a guide in choosing the spiritual
discipline. Of course, one should not want to enter a discipline
with which one did not have a heartfelt rapport, but one should be
certain that this attraction is not just an aesthetic preference,
but a decision grounded in understanding. One should not, for
instance, enter a tradition that requires strict and strenuous
self-discipline from the onset if one's self-analysis has shown a
lack of discipline. It is not the role of spiritual training to
cure character flaws; that is the role of counseling. If a person
should attempt this discipline before they are ready, they would
surely fail. In doing so, they would cause a good deal of
disruption in their spiritual community as well. It would be
better to find a spiritual tradition which is demanding but allows
a steady progression of the individual through the discipline.
While it is often necessary to place questions on hold while
taking instruction, we still must be able to use common sense. In
my experience, any discipline which requires you to violate common
sense consistently is a discipline to avoid. While it is true that
some traditions do use non-rational techniques such as Zen Koans in
training, these traditions do not advocate abandoning the use of
reason in daily life.
One should also determine which aspects of spiritual practice
are essential to spiritual growth and which are peripheral. Those
aspects of practice which are of peripheral importance should be
treated as such. Many forms and manners of spiritual traditions
are merely remnants of cultural tradition instead of essential
elements of spiritual practice.
It is not unusual for people to value the trappings of a
spiritual tradition more than its content. In this bland and
amorphic culture we live in, the experience of ancient forms of
worship, which are often rich in ritual, and full of brocade,
incense, and antiquity, can be quite intoxicating. While there is
nothing wrong with drinking in the sensuality of life, we do not
want to get so drunk that we lose perspective. Another thing to
consider is that it is much easier to put on a colored robe and
shave your head than it is to change what is inside you. Self-
transformation is not always self-evident, and it carries no
requisite external reward sufficient to hold the attention of
weaker students.
I always try to remind my students that they should become
practitioners, not "true believers." True Believers tend to get
lost in doctrine at the expense of practice. If one spends all day
reading the maps, one will not have time to take the trip. And if
one gets caught up in the infinite realms of potential, one can
spend an extraordinary amount of time dealing with fantasy and
arcane esoteric doctrines that would take all three Buddhas and a
rabbi a millennia to sort out.
If I might offer some further advice for students planning to
engage in spiritual discipline, it would be in the choice of a
teacher. It is better to look for a teacher who is extraordinary
not in personality, but in conduct. Look for a person who is
centered! A gentle person, humble, open and compassionate with
firm self-discipline. This person also should not have an extensive
attachment to money. Spiritual instruction should never be
expensive. It is also true that a spiritual tradition that has a
temple or church needs the support of its members. Therefore, you
should invest your finances with the same intelligence as you
invest your time and energy in your practice. To put it simply,
don't be cheap, and don't be stupid, either.
The qualities of enlightenment are not the magical powers or
psychic sideshow of the fakir. The magical is a window between the
numinous realm and our practice. A good definition of magic is the
penetration of the phenomenal realm by the numinous that reveals
the significance of life. Such experiences have great potential
for giving personal spiritual illumination, but if one attaches
oneself to *external magic* (the phantasmagoria itself) one will
become lost in it. Spiritual practitioners, after all, will be
required to live their own lives in this world, and in this time
and place. The value of practice is in the here an now, no in
ancient Egypt, Tibet, China or Atlantis. Without question, the
person we look to for guidance in the spiritual realm should be
able to live in this same modern world with us, in freedom and
power, without rejecting any of it.
Among the teachings of Tibet's great sage Milarepa, there is
a listing of ten signs of the Superior Person. I do not think one
can find a better guide for choosing a spiritual preceptor than
these:
1. To have little pride and envy is the sign of the superior
person.
2. To have few desires and satisfaction with simple things
is the sign of the superior person.
3. To be lacking in hypocrisy and deceit is the sign of the
superior person.
4. To regulate one's conduct in accordance with the law of
cause and effect as carefully as one would guard the
pupils of one's eyes is the sign of the superior person.
5. To be faithful in one's engagement and obligations is the
sign of the superior person.
6. To be able to keep alive friendships while regarding all
beings with impartiality is the sign of the superior
person.
7. To look with pity and without anger upon those who live
evilly is the sign of the superior person.
8. To allow others the victory, taking on the defeat, is the
sign of the superior person.
9. To differ from the multitudes in every thought and deed
is the sign of the superior person.
10. To observe faithfully and without pride one's spiritual
vows is the sign of the superior person.
If you can find a teacher with these qualities, then you will
have certainly found a rare gem. Polish it brightly be completing
your Work. Then the coal of your own ego will transform it to the
diamond of truth, and you and your teacher will become one. Like
Zen Master Zenrin Kokushu you will be able to say:
Sitting Quietly
Doing Nothing
Spring Comes
and the grass grows by itself
-----
Stephen Echard-Musgrave Roshi is a Zen master in the Soto tradition
of Japan, and has also received teaching sanction from the Korean,
Vietnamese, and Chinese traditions of Zen Buddhism. Echard Roshi
teaches at the Zen Institute of San Diego (619) 582-9888.
--------
Gary Ray
---
* QMPro 1.50 42-0864 * Why has the Western Barbarian no beard? MUMONKAN4
EOF
From tyagi@HouseofKaos.Abyss.com Fri Nov 11 04:47:28 1994
From: tyagi mordred nagasiva
Subject: tantrwmn.nc.txt
To: ceci@lysator.liu.se (Ceci Henningsson)
Date: Thu, 10 Nov 1994 19:46:41 -0800 (PST)
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL0]
Content-Type: text
Content-Length: 75592
To: Internet
From: Dharma Publications 'Gassho' (dharma@netcom.com)
Subject: Tantra/Women (Ngakpa Chogyam Rinpoche)
THE MOTHER ESSENCE LINEAGE
by Ngakpa Chogyam Rinpoche
- Yeshe Tsogyel -
The greatest inspiration and role model for women, in terms of Tibetan
Buddhism, is the enlightened yogini Yeshe Tsogyel (Ye-shes mTsho-rGyal).
Yeshe means 'primordial wisdom', and Tsogyel means 'queen of the ocean-
like quality of Mind'. She is the female Buddha of the Nyingma School. As
an historical figure she is mother of all Nyingma Lineages. Yeshe Tsogyel,
together with her incarnation and emanations are an inspiration to women
as role models, and to men as teachers.
According to the teachings of the Mother Essence Lineage, there are three
styles of teacher-student relationship; according to mDo (Sutra), rGyud
(Tantra), and rDzogs-chen (Mahasandhi). According to Sutra one needs a
teacher of the same gender. According to Tantra one needs a teacher of the
other, or inverse gender. According to Dzogchen the gender of the teacher
is irrelevant. From the perspective of Tantra, therefore, female teachers
are role models for women and teachers for men -- whereas male teachers
are teachers for women and role models for men. Within the Mother Essence
Lineage, the practice of everyday life is approached from the View of
Tantra, and formal practice is approached from the View of Dzogchen. This
account of the Mother Essence Lineage is written in a style that
emphasizes View rather than practice; and so it emphasizes the perspective
of Tantra. There is tremendous emphasis on what is called living the View
in the Mother Essence Lineage, and this is a style of practice that is
particularly suited to women.
Yeshe Tsogyel was the sang-yum or spiritual consort of Padmasambhava.
Padmasambhava is known in the Nyingma School of Tibetan Buddhism as the
second Buddha. Padmasambhava was the founder of Buddhism in Tibet, and the
Nyingma (Ancient) School represents the first spread of Buddhism in Tibet
when it surged with the spiritual dynamism provoked by Padmasambhava and
Yeshe Tsogyel. Padmasambhava's birth and activity were predicted by Buddha
Shakyamuni, who said that a being of tremendous power and compassion would
appear after his death, who had the capacity to transmit the teaching and
practices of Tantra. The two primary aspects of the practice of Tantra
consist of wisdom and active-compassion, and these are regarded as being
female and male qualities respectively. Wisdom and active-compassion are
fundamentally the enlightened human qualities of Emptiness and Form -- the
ornaments of non-duality. (This is a teaching that is also fundamental to
the Sutric teaching. It is found in the Heart Sutra, in which it is stated
that Form is Emptiness and Emptiness is Form.) With regard to Tantra,
Padmasambhava is Form or active-compassion, and Yeshe Tsogyel is Emptiness
or wisdom. From this perspective, the whole of reality is seen as the
dance of Padmasambhava and Yeshe Tsogyel. Within the Ngakphang Sangha of
the Nyingma School, every Lama and her or his spiritual consort are
Padmasambhava and Yeshe Tsogyel as far as their disciples are concerned.
In the Mother Essence Lineage, Yeshe Togyel and her incarnations and
emanations are of primary importance, because she is the Mother of Vision,
and therefore the Mother of non-dual experience. Tantra contains methods
that are particularly valuable for women, because of their emphasis on the
development of Vision. It is said, within the Tantric teachings, that
women have greater capacity for realization than men because of their
greater natural resonance with the sphere of Visionary practice. The most
inspirational example in the Tantric tradition of the profound capacity of
women is Yeshe Tsogyel. She was the first Tibetan woman to achieve
Buddhahood and has had numerous incarnations and emanations in Tibet and
the other Himalayan countries. The Visionary origin of the Mother Essence
Lineage is Yeshe Tsogyel, and her influence can be traced forward to the
twentieth century through her incarnations. The incarnations of Yeshe
Tsogyel include: Machig Lapdron; Jomo Menmo; Jomo Chhi-'med Pema; and,
Jetsunma Khandro Yeshe Rema -- the women who gave birth to the pure-vision
revelations that are called the Aro gTer of the Mother Essence Lineage.
Those interested to learn more about the life of Yeshe Tsogyel are
referred to Keith Dowman's excellent book 'Sky Dancer', which chronicles
her birth, life and realization -- along with a marvellous commentary on
the nature of the three inner Tantras. Because this text is easily
available, there is no need to discuss the life of Yeshe Tsogyel in this
account of the Mother Essence Lineage.
Machig Lapdron (Ma-gChig Lap-sGron) 'Unique Mother Torch of Practice' was
the incarnation of Yeshe Tsogyel. Machig Lapdron was the great Tibetan
yogini who was the originator of the practice of Chod -- the Visionary
practice of cutting attachment to one's corporeal form (in terms of the
dualistic proclivity to relate to ones corporeal form as a reference-point
that proves one's existence). Machig Lapdron too, is quite well chronicled
in various texts that are currently available. Jomo Menmo is regarded
generally as an emanation of Yeshe Tsogyel; but specifically, in the
Mother Essence Lineage, as the incarnation of Machig Lapdron. Jomo Menmo,
however, is not very well known to Western audiences, and so I will give a
short account of her life that was given to me orally by Jetsunma Khandro
Ten'dzin Drolkar, a great hidden yogini of the Nyingma School whom I have
had the good fortune to know as a friend and mentor since 1975.
- Jomo Menmo -
Jomo Menmo Pema Tsokyi (Jom-mo sMan-mo Padma mTsho-sKyid) was born in the
Earth Male monkey year (1248 CE) and passed into the sky-dimension in 1283
CE. She was born in the magical vicinity of the cave in which both
Padmasambhava and Yeshe Tsogyel once stayed. The place was called
Zarmolung which was located in an area of Tibet called E-yul, which means
'primordial-awareness country'. Her parents named her Pema Tsokyi which
means 'Lotus of the Ocean'. Her childhood was relatively uneventful and
her parents were fairly ordinary people. She spent her childhood helping
with the general work of living in a family and also helped with herding
the yaks and dris. At the onset of puberty (in the Spring of 1261),
whilst she was grazing the yaks and dris in the high pasture lands, she
fell asleep in a meadow. The al | | |
