This is why I doubt equipping cops with cameras will do any good. Even when it's caught on tape, they rarely ever get charged for killing an unarmed person, whether it's by beating, shooting, or choking:
Grand Jury Lets Cop Choke Guy To Death Because Everything Is Terrible
The problems are built into the very fabric of our justice system. Nevertheless, I've seen a lot of people lately posting things like, "Not all cops are bad. Not all black people are criminals. Not all white people are racists. Quit labeling." This is true, not all cops are bad people, just as not all black people are criminals and not all white people are racists. But what people don't seem to understand here is the oppressive nature of the police as a social institution itself.
Individual police officers may very well be good people; but the real issue is, the police as a whole are primarily protectors of property and enforcers of the state, as well as a means of extracting surplus-value from working people (through parking tickets, traffic fines, etc.). They get their marching orders from the ruling class, not 'the people'; and more often than not, it's minorities and the poor that are the most affected by those policies.
When the police target the poor, the homeless, minorities, etc., they primarily do so because of institutionalized pressures created by those in power. Sit-lie and anti-camping ordinances, for example, are two ways for the state to legally harass homeless people by forcing them to move if they're sitting or lying anywhere in certain areas at anytime, often at the behest of local business alliances.
And there are numerous other laws that target minorities and the poor, such as harsher penalties for someone caught with crack cocaine, which is more prevalent in poorer communities and communities of colour, than powder cocaine, which is a more 'affluent' form of the drug, despite no physiological differences between the two. (In 2010, the sentencing disparity between offenses for crack and powder cocaine was finally reduced from 100:1 to 18:1 thanks to the Fair Sentencing Act.) It's a two-tiered justice system weighed heavily in favour of the wealthy.
When the police send in riot cops to arrest protesters, even if they're non-violent and protesting a gross injustice, they do so because they're more concerned about protecting property and making sure economic supply-lines for both goods and labour (i.e., roads) remain open than they are justice and the lives of the people they're allegedly there to 'serve and protect.'
And due to the lingering effects of racism, from slavery, Jim Crow laws, and the practice of redlining to the unconscious racial biases that still haunt our perception, our judicial system is disproportionately biased against minorities, particularly the black community. Non-whites statistically get targeted more than whites; non-whites statistically get harsher sentences than whites; etc.
But what this case and others like it demonstrate to me is that, ultimately, justice doesn't exist for the state. The Establishment and those designed to serve and protect the interests of the ruling class and wealthy are above the laws that the rest of us plebs are subject to. They play by an entirely different set of rules.
A cop killing an unarmed black man? Or an unarmed, mentally-ill, homeless person who didn't do anything wrong, like James Chasse? No grounds for indictment. But a black man killing a cop? A homeless person killing a cop, even in self-defense? Shit. They'd probably never see the light of day, if they weren't killed themselves in retaliation.
But I think people are finally getting tired of the disparities, the growing militarization of the police, and the lack of accountability. In a lot of these cases, the cops seem like they're above the law.
Wednesday, December 3, 2014
Monday, November 24, 2014
ferguson
Ferguson. What can I say about it? Not much, really. I don't live there, and nothing I say will change the situation. I'm just some dude in Portland reacting to the news. That said, two thoughts immediately come to mind. One is, I'm tired of police officers getting away with murder, particularly the murder of unarmed people of colour, the homeless, and the mentally ill. It happens way too often, and no one is ever held accountable.
The second is, I love all the middle-class white people who don't have to worry about cops shooting them to death for simply walking down the street criticizing the people who live with this terrorism ever day, and who get justifiably upset when cop after cop gets little more than a paid slap on the wrist for shooting an unarmed person to death in their community. If you were in their position, you'd be a little pissed off, too. Don't let your relative privilege blind you to the oppression and suffering of others. The whole thing brings to mind something MLK Jr. said in 1968:
The second is, I love all the middle-class white people who don't have to worry about cops shooting them to death for simply walking down the street criticizing the people who live with this terrorism ever day, and who get justifiably upset when cop after cop gets little more than a paid slap on the wrist for shooting an unarmed person to death in their community. If you were in their position, you'd be a little pissed off, too. Don't let your relative privilege blind you to the oppression and suffering of others. The whole thing brings to mind something MLK Jr. said in 1968:
[A] riot is the language of the unheard. And what is it America has failed to hear? It has failed to hear 3 of 8 that the plight of the negro poor has worsened over the last twelve or fifteen years. It has failed to hear that the promises of freedom and justice have not been met. And it has failed to hear that large segments of white society are more concerned about tranquility and the status quo than about justice and humanity.
Saturday, November 15, 2014
serve the people
I haven't been inspired to write much about politics lately, but I thought this Jacobin article was rather interesting in that it helps to illustrate the underlying moral foundation of capitalism, one making the last, first, and the first, last. With all of our technological innovations and productive capabilities, the question arises, Why don't we live in a world of material security for all? What's stopping us?
The obstacle, in my opinion, is an increasingly outdated mode of production and the ideology underlying it. Our productive capacities are such that we no longer have a material necessity for capitalist wage-labour and artificial scarcity, but the demand for profit creates an economic system that consistently depresses our productive capabilities and produces artificial scarcity, limiting the production and consumption of commodities to only that which can realize profit.
Just looking around at the world today and all the thing we've accomplished, I think it's fairly obvious that we've reached an epoch of potential material abundance via the technological advancements and innovations of the past. Nevertheless, the old masters are refusing to let go of their death grip on wealth and power, their ownership of the means of production, finance, etc., stalling our transition to a post-capitalist society. And in many ways, we, too, are stalling that transition by buying into the dominate ideology of the ruling class.
I think the growth of this ideology partially has its roots in the early days of capitalism, being influenced by a combination of factors including the emergence of the 'Protestant work ethic' in conjunction with the enclosure of English commons, anti-idleness and poverty legislation, poorhouses, and the transition of people (often forced) from serfdom into wage-labour. In this process, the idea of making money, and especially the idea of capital accumulation, took on a moral framework in which being idle (i.e., not making money) was seen as something immoral and sinful. In essence, wage-labour became something almost sacred. And this attitude wasn't just limited to the growth of capitalism in Europe, but made its way to the New World as well. For example, the ethics of hard work and accumulation can be found in the writings of Benjamin Franklin, who coined the phrase "time is money":
But it's not just the ruling elite who turn a blind eye to poverty and deprivation, nor isn't only the ruling class who thinks of the poor, the homeless, and the least among us as parasites infesting our society. As Marx writes in The Germany Ideology, "the ideas of the ruling class are in every epoch the ruling ideas," meaning that "[t]he class which has the means of material production at its disposal, has control at the same time over the means of mental production, so that thereby, generally speaking, the ideas of those who lack the means of mental production are subject to it." Hence, a society's culture, religion, and political institutions will be heavily influenced by the ideas of those who "regulate the production and distribution of the ideas of their age."
For example, I think that Jane Devin's 2012 article, "Walmart Greeter Buys 6-Pack of Beer & Is Condemned" (which, for some reason, has disappeared)," does a decent job of illustrating a common double standard in regard to how today's self-identified 'middle class' judges both the rich and poor, a pseudo-moral judgmentalism that I think ultimately stems from an ideology dominated by wealthy, ruling-class elites. The growing trend to, in her words, "flog the poor for their perceived failings and abuses, while at the same time [ignoring] the capricious excesses of the rich" is evidence of this; and I think the self-made myth and the meritocracy myth are two examples of ideas that originate with the ruling class and, due to their ideological dominance, influence the rest of society.
It may seem like there's no alternative, that we've reached the 'end of history' and the final phase of our socio-cultural evolution; but I honestly believe we have the capacity to create a world characterized by equality and material abundance in which things like distinctions of rich and poor and oppression truly become superfluous—one that no longer caters to one class of owners, but to the needs of all.
The obstacle, in my opinion, is an increasingly outdated mode of production and the ideology underlying it. Our productive capacities are such that we no longer have a material necessity for capitalist wage-labour and artificial scarcity, but the demand for profit creates an economic system that consistently depresses our productive capabilities and produces artificial scarcity, limiting the production and consumption of commodities to only that which can realize profit.
Just looking around at the world today and all the thing we've accomplished, I think it's fairly obvious that we've reached an epoch of potential material abundance via the technological advancements and innovations of the past. Nevertheless, the old masters are refusing to let go of their death grip on wealth and power, their ownership of the means of production, finance, etc., stalling our transition to a post-capitalist society. And in many ways, we, too, are stalling that transition by buying into the dominate ideology of the ruling class.
I think the growth of this ideology partially has its roots in the early days of capitalism, being influenced by a combination of factors including the emergence of the 'Protestant work ethic' in conjunction with the enclosure of English commons, anti-idleness and poverty legislation, poorhouses, and the transition of people (often forced) from serfdom into wage-labour. In this process, the idea of making money, and especially the idea of capital accumulation, took on a moral framework in which being idle (i.e., not making money) was seen as something immoral and sinful. In essence, wage-labour became something almost sacred. And this attitude wasn't just limited to the growth of capitalism in Europe, but made its way to the New World as well. For example, the ethics of hard work and accumulation can be found in the writings of Benjamin Franklin, who coined the phrase "time is money":
Remember, that time is money. He that can earn ten shillings a day by his labor, and goes abroad, or sits idle, one half of that day, though he spends but sixpence during his diversion or idleness, ought not to reckon that the only expense; he has really spent, or rather thrown away, five shillings besides. [...] Remember, that money is the prolific, generating nature. Money can beget money, and its offspring can beget more, and so on. Five shillings turned is six, turned again is seven and threepence, and so on, till it becomes a hundred pounds. The more there is of it, the more it produces every turning, so that the profits rise quicker and quicker. He that kills a breeding sow, destroys all her offspring to the thousandth generation. He that murders a crown, destroys all that it might have produced, even scores of pounds.
But it's not just the ruling elite who turn a blind eye to poverty and deprivation, nor isn't only the ruling class who thinks of the poor, the homeless, and the least among us as parasites infesting our society. As Marx writes in The Germany Ideology, "the ideas of the ruling class are in every epoch the ruling ideas," meaning that "[t]he class which has the means of material production at its disposal, has control at the same time over the means of mental production, so that thereby, generally speaking, the ideas of those who lack the means of mental production are subject to it." Hence, a society's culture, religion, and political institutions will be heavily influenced by the ideas of those who "regulate the production and distribution of the ideas of their age."
For example, I think that Jane Devin's 2012 article, "Walmart Greeter Buys 6-Pack of Beer & Is Condemned" (which, for some reason, has disappeared)," does a decent job of illustrating a common double standard in regard to how today's self-identified 'middle class' judges both the rich and poor, a pseudo-moral judgmentalism that I think ultimately stems from an ideology dominated by wealthy, ruling-class elites. The growing trend to, in her words, "flog the poor for their perceived failings and abuses, while at the same time [ignoring] the capricious excesses of the rich" is evidence of this; and I think the self-made myth and the meritocracy myth are two examples of ideas that originate with the ruling class and, due to their ideological dominance, influence the rest of society.
It may seem like there's no alternative, that we've reached the 'end of history' and the final phase of our socio-cultural evolution; but I honestly believe we have the capacity to create a world characterized by equality and material abundance in which things like distinctions of rich and poor and oppression truly become superfluous—one that no longer caters to one class of owners, but to the needs of all.
Sunday, October 26, 2014
explaining my political cynicism, where jesus and marxism meet
Talking about voting yesterday, I realized that the simplest ways of explaining my apathy towards our two-party electoral system is as follows: Liberals idealize the state as much as conservatives idealize the market, neither seeing how each is co-dependent and exploitative under capitalism. Instead of being a people-centered system, we live within a profit-centered system. And under that system, liberals think things like poverty and other social ills can be fixed by the state, while conservatives think the magic is in market, both ideas equally as wrong due to the inherent contradictions within capitalism. Voting for one of the two major parties, you're essentially voting for different sides of the same coin. And voting for a third party is effective as a statement, but certainly nothing revolutionary. That's not to say our votes don't count because they can at least steer the direction of policy; but we shouldn't delude ourselves into thinking that that direction isn't severely limited by the structure of the system itself. The logic of any institution is first and foremost to preserve itself. You can't vote away poverty et al. in capitalism anymore than you can vote away money; and the majority of the most meaningful change in society comes about through our interactions with one another at the local level, individually (in our homes, work places, etc.) and as a community. Checking a box every year or two isn't half as important as how you treat your neighbour and vice versa, and living by the maxim, "From each according to their ability, to each according to their need."
Sunday, October 19, 2014
pah bah
Pah bah means 'forest cloth' in Thai; and the festival comes out of the ancient tradition of leaving cloth in the forest for monks to find for them to make their robes after the end of the three-month rains retreat. It's a time for the lay-community to 'draw close' and offer the monastic community gifts of cloth and other supplies they'll need for the coming year as they rely totally on the generosity of the lay-community.
One of the overarching themes was anumodana, which means 'rejoicing together' in goodness and generosity and/or offering encouragement. Gathering together and giving our time and support to one another produces a field of merit or goodness that brings happiness to everyone, those who give as well as those who receive.
Just as charity plays a big role in Christianity, the Buddha placed a lot of importance on dana or generosity as well. Generosity arises out of wholesome mental states, and gives rise to numerous benefits on its own. In addition, generosity is considered a requisite for spiritual development. I've always found it interesting that the Buddha begins most of his discourses on the gradual training with teachings on generosity.
After the ceremony, a group of us drove the short distance to the hermitage for a tour. The main building, a small house, has a kitchen, an office area, and a shrine where the monks gather for chanting and meals. Then there's a guest house, for the abbot or visiting monks, and a couple of small dwellings for the monks to sleep and meditate.
I felt bad that I missed mass in order to go to the Pah Bah, but I'm glad I went. It was a beautiful event. And in many ways, it felt kind of the same.
Saturday, October 11, 2014
the world must be crazy
I've become rather cynical as of late when it comes to politics and religion.
I see, for example, the problems that we're facing as a society, problems that stem in large part from the way our society is currently structured, and I instinctively want to fix them. But the solutions that I see are rejected by most as being too radical, utopian etc., and I can't seem to convince anyone to see things any differently, as if the status quo hasn't been consistently creating the conditions for systematic inequality and catastrophic global climate change for centuries. Whatever I do or say, I feel like Sisyphus, rolling a boulder up a hill just to watch it roll back down again.
The majority of people seem to be politically apathetic; and the majority of those who aren't seem to be satisfied with lesser evilism. And don't get me started on the sectarian triumphalism of political parties that, in my opinion, sell a lot of snake oil to the faithful, but fail to do much of anything that's truly efficacious and for the good of all, dividing people more than uniting them in common cause. And much like in the realm of political parties, I think the sectarian triumphalism of religious institutions is guilty of the same when it comes to spirituality.
Individually, there are a lot of good people and groups out there doing a lot of good things in the world; but collectively, on the macro level, I don't see quite the same—I see conflict, division, and shortsightedness where it really counts. It's especially apparent to me after spending time at a monastery; when I come back to the 'worldly life,' the ways we live, the things we think are important, etc., seem so crazy in contrast. It's like as a society, we're ill; but we don't think we're ill, and we childishly fight against most of the things that can potentially make us healthier. The sanest and happiest people I know seem to be the ones who have renounced the world.
I don't know. I think I'm at least understanding the inner motives of hermits.
I see, for example, the problems that we're facing as a society, problems that stem in large part from the way our society is currently structured, and I instinctively want to fix them. But the solutions that I see are rejected by most as being too radical, utopian etc., and I can't seem to convince anyone to see things any differently, as if the status quo hasn't been consistently creating the conditions for systematic inequality and catastrophic global climate change for centuries. Whatever I do or say, I feel like Sisyphus, rolling a boulder up a hill just to watch it roll back down again.
The majority of people seem to be politically apathetic; and the majority of those who aren't seem to be satisfied with lesser evilism. And don't get me started on the sectarian triumphalism of political parties that, in my opinion, sell a lot of snake oil to the faithful, but fail to do much of anything that's truly efficacious and for the good of all, dividing people more than uniting them in common cause. And much like in the realm of political parties, I think the sectarian triumphalism of religious institutions is guilty of the same when it comes to spirituality.
Individually, there are a lot of good people and groups out there doing a lot of good things in the world; but collectively, on the macro level, I don't see quite the same—I see conflict, division, and shortsightedness where it really counts. It's especially apparent to me after spending time at a monastery; when I come back to the 'worldly life,' the ways we live, the things we think are important, etc., seem so crazy in contrast. It's like as a society, we're ill; but we don't think we're ill, and we childishly fight against most of the things that can potentially make us healthier. The sanest and happiest people I know seem to be the ones who have renounced the world.
I don't know. I think I'm at least understanding the inner motives of hermits.
Sunday, September 28, 2014
noble friendship, part deux
This weekend I had the opportunity to attend my third retreat at Wat Atam, and the second led by Sakula, the spiritual director of Portland Friends of the Dhamma. The theme of the retreat was based around the threefold practice of virtue, concentration, and discernment, and how they're all integral to a successful practice.
The first night, when everyone attending was encouraged to observe the eight precepts while at the retreat, she talked about importance of virtue, which on the negative end consists of things we should refrain from doing, i.e., not harming living beings, not stealing, not committing sexual misconduct, not lying or using harsh speech, and not indulging in intoxicating drinks and drugs that lead to carelessness. But on the positive side, they encourage us to be kind and compassionate towards living beings, to be generous, to have safe and healthy relationships, to be honest and thoughtful in our speech, and to live in a clear and mindful way.
Besides helping to protect ourselves and others from the results of our unskillful actions, virtue is important because it acts as the foundation for our practice. For one, it helps to provide the meditator with a mind that's free from remorse and regret; and a mind that's free from remorse and regret is better able to develop deep states of concentration, which are difficult to develop when the mind is consistently worried or agitated (AN 11.2). And one thing Sakula had us do was to think of something skillful we did and delight in how good it made us feel.
(Believe me, a mind that's happier and lighter is a lot easier to observe and train. I know from experience. It's hard to meditate when you've done a lot of things you regret; they're the first things that pop up when the mind starts to get quiet.)
For most of the second day, the focus shifted to concentration. Often, living according to our desires, we develop habits that aren't necessarily good for us. We instinctually grasp for what's pleasant and push away what's not, rarely being fully aware of our intentions or what even we're doing. The problem is, in doing so, we suffer when that changes and we're separated with what's pleasant or come face-to-face with what isn't (SN 56.11). We may also do something because it gives us a short-term pleasure, only to end up suffering a great deal later on because of it. And this happens because our minds are untrained in restraint, mindfulness, and wisdom. To strengthen these tools, we need to first develop our virtue and then develop our powers concentration.
Just like a body that isn't used to exercise finds relatively intense physical activity difficult, if not impossible, a mind that isn't 'exercised' has difficulty turning inwards and being aware of the subtle mental activities and habits that give rise to suffering. We tend to take it for granted that what we're doing or thinking is the 'right' thing, but oftentimes what we're really doing is feeding our suffering. As Sakula mentioned, unpleasant thoughts and feelings will arise, but they'll also soon cease, unless of course we feed and sustain them, not being mindful of how feeding them can actually cause more problems than the initial thoughts and feelings themselves. We simply can't let them go.
We spent most of the day alternating between walking and sitting meditation, trying to focus on the breath or the soles of our feet while also trying to be aware of how our minds were reacting to thoughts and feelings and sensations, and when possible, letting them arise without pouncing on them and turning our attention away from our object. I had a lot of trouble with that, though, and found myself easily distracted.
At the end of the second day, as well as the last, she touched on wisdom. Wisdom is what can ultimately cut the roots of greed, hatred, and delusion. It's the aspect of our mental faculty that's capable of judging which of our intentions are skillful and unskillful, and more importantly, of abandoning what's unskillful. It dives through our desires and the narratives that we create, allowing us to see the deep and subtle way the mid works and giving us the ability to to really go against the flow of our craving. With wisdom, we can enjoy the pleasant without indulging in it and getting carried away by it; and we can endure the unpleasant without having to become overwhelmed by it.
One of the similes she gave that I really liked was of a person walking on some train tracks who's completely distracted by all the sights and sounds around them, unmindful of the train coming up behind them. The person is our mind, the sights and sounds are all the pleasant things we instinctually grasp, and the train represents both the unpleasant things in life and the changing nature of phenomena that tends to barrel us over. Concentration is what helps us turn around and see the train coming; wisdom is our ability to step off the track and watch it pass by rather than let it barrel us over unawares or to try and stop it in its tracks.
The last day was a special treat for me since it was not only Thai Vegan Day, with Wat Atam's community of lay-followers providing a feast of vegetarian Thai food for everyone to share, but one of my old teachers, Ajahn Prasert from Wat Buddhanusorn, was visiting to help raise a fund for sick and injured monks in the US.
Admittedly, I had a hard time meditating or really cultivating any wisdom this weekend. I did gain a deeper appreciation of virtue, however, especially that of others, and felt a lot of gratitude the whole time for all the kindness and generosity that made this retreat even possible for me, from Ajahn Ritthi for hosting it and Sakula for leading it, to Greg and Alistair for lagging behind and braving the I-5 rush-hour traffic so I could carpool with them and Phil and Marie at work who gave me an extra hand so I could get out of work on time and actually catch my ride.
There was a lot more to the retreat, but those are a few things that stuck with me the most. It was disheartening to realize how much I've slacked on my meditation practice and how I was luck if I could be truly mindful of three breaths the entire weekend, but it was equally as heartening being surrounded by such encouraging and supportive people.
The first night, when everyone attending was encouraged to observe the eight precepts while at the retreat, she talked about importance of virtue, which on the negative end consists of things we should refrain from doing, i.e., not harming living beings, not stealing, not committing sexual misconduct, not lying or using harsh speech, and not indulging in intoxicating drinks and drugs that lead to carelessness. But on the positive side, they encourage us to be kind and compassionate towards living beings, to be generous, to have safe and healthy relationships, to be honest and thoughtful in our speech, and to live in a clear and mindful way.
Besides helping to protect ourselves and others from the results of our unskillful actions, virtue is important because it acts as the foundation for our practice. For one, it helps to provide the meditator with a mind that's free from remorse and regret; and a mind that's free from remorse and regret is better able to develop deep states of concentration, which are difficult to develop when the mind is consistently worried or agitated (AN 11.2). And one thing Sakula had us do was to think of something skillful we did and delight in how good it made us feel.
(Believe me, a mind that's happier and lighter is a lot easier to observe and train. I know from experience. It's hard to meditate when you've done a lot of things you regret; they're the first things that pop up when the mind starts to get quiet.)
For most of the second day, the focus shifted to concentration. Often, living according to our desires, we develop habits that aren't necessarily good for us. We instinctually grasp for what's pleasant and push away what's not, rarely being fully aware of our intentions or what even we're doing. The problem is, in doing so, we suffer when that changes and we're separated with what's pleasant or come face-to-face with what isn't (SN 56.11). We may also do something because it gives us a short-term pleasure, only to end up suffering a great deal later on because of it. And this happens because our minds are untrained in restraint, mindfulness, and wisdom. To strengthen these tools, we need to first develop our virtue and then develop our powers concentration.Just like a body that isn't used to exercise finds relatively intense physical activity difficult, if not impossible, a mind that isn't 'exercised' has difficulty turning inwards and being aware of the subtle mental activities and habits that give rise to suffering. We tend to take it for granted that what we're doing or thinking is the 'right' thing, but oftentimes what we're really doing is feeding our suffering. As Sakula mentioned, unpleasant thoughts and feelings will arise, but they'll also soon cease, unless of course we feed and sustain them, not being mindful of how feeding them can actually cause more problems than the initial thoughts and feelings themselves. We simply can't let them go.
We spent most of the day alternating between walking and sitting meditation, trying to focus on the breath or the soles of our feet while also trying to be aware of how our minds were reacting to thoughts and feelings and sensations, and when possible, letting them arise without pouncing on them and turning our attention away from our object. I had a lot of trouble with that, though, and found myself easily distracted.
At the end of the second day, as well as the last, she touched on wisdom. Wisdom is what can ultimately cut the roots of greed, hatred, and delusion. It's the aspect of our mental faculty that's capable of judging which of our intentions are skillful and unskillful, and more importantly, of abandoning what's unskillful. It dives through our desires and the narratives that we create, allowing us to see the deep and subtle way the mid works and giving us the ability to to really go against the flow of our craving. With wisdom, we can enjoy the pleasant without indulging in it and getting carried away by it; and we can endure the unpleasant without having to become overwhelmed by it.One of the similes she gave that I really liked was of a person walking on some train tracks who's completely distracted by all the sights and sounds around them, unmindful of the train coming up behind them. The person is our mind, the sights and sounds are all the pleasant things we instinctually grasp, and the train represents both the unpleasant things in life and the changing nature of phenomena that tends to barrel us over. Concentration is what helps us turn around and see the train coming; wisdom is our ability to step off the track and watch it pass by rather than let it barrel us over unawares or to try and stop it in its tracks.
The last day was a special treat for me since it was not only Thai Vegan Day, with Wat Atam's community of lay-followers providing a feast of vegetarian Thai food for everyone to share, but one of my old teachers, Ajahn Prasert from Wat Buddhanusorn, was visiting to help raise a fund for sick and injured monks in the US.Admittedly, I had a hard time meditating or really cultivating any wisdom this weekend. I did gain a deeper appreciation of virtue, however, especially that of others, and felt a lot of gratitude the whole time for all the kindness and generosity that made this retreat even possible for me, from Ajahn Ritthi for hosting it and Sakula for leading it, to Greg and Alistair for lagging behind and braving the I-5 rush-hour traffic so I could carpool with them and Phil and Marie at work who gave me an extra hand so I could get out of work on time and actually catch my ride.
There was a lot more to the retreat, but those are a few things that stuck with me the most. It was disheartening to realize how much I've slacked on my meditation practice and how I was luck if I could be truly mindful of three breaths the entire weekend, but it was equally as heartening being surrounded by such encouraging and supportive people.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
