Sulak Sivaraska is my Hero

On Self-reliance

Contrary to popular misinterpretation, in Buddhism self-reliance does not imply an autonomous, asocial, ahistorical, perfectly translucent, and transcendental self. So it is neither like the Cartesian self, nor like the rugged neoliberal and consumerist self of late capitalism. Rather, there is a certain “naturalism” or immanence in the Buddhist notion. By this I mean that there’s no supernatural intervention in human activities and that although the self is ‘ambiguous’ and shaped by nature, culture, and history, it is amenable through self-training and experimentation such as via meditation and proper breathing—hence the “not-self” in Buddhism. I have stressed on countless occasions that the Buddhist response to Descartes is “I breathe therefore I am,” and this constitutes what may be called spirituality—which entails the care of the self—or the ‘simple magic’ and ‘small wonder’ of Buddhism. This immanence, which is without guarantees since there is no metaphysical comfort, becomes a preliminary condition for the persistent cultivation of generosity, compassion, and wisdom; that is, the transformation of greed into generosity, hatred into compassion, and delusion or ignorance into wisdom. Again, these are tied to humility and simplicity. The Buddha after all was a simple monk. And they all cannot be cultivated without being engaged with the world, without having virtuous companions, and without confronting the sufferings in the world mindfully and nonviolently.

Since there is no autonomous self, self-reliance is then about being in and with the world, about what Thich Nhat Nanh calls “inter-being”. Self-reliance does not mean self-attachment or clinging to the self. Put more mundanely, it’s about interdependence since we are all vulnerable and life is precarious or fragile, and we are not perfectly sovereign. This condition cannot be willed away—our skins cannot be willed away—even if we live in gated or fortified communities patrolled by private security firms, acquire immense wealth, etc. In Buddhism, happiness entails traveling on the Middle Path without self-attachment. Devotees of the Buddha (lay or otherwise) are expected to examine themselves on a daily basis. And the things to be contemplated on a daily basis (Abhinhapaccavekkhana) are as follows.

1. One should again and again contemplate: I am subject to decay and cannot escape it.
2. I am subject to disease and I cannot escape it.
3. I am subject to death and cannot escape it.
4. There will be division and separation from all that are dear to me and beloved.
5. I am owner of my deed, whatever deed I do, whether good or bad, I shall become heir to it.

Greed, hatred, and delusion are tools to foster a perfectly sovereign self, which is roguish by nature. We kill others, we dominate others, represent various isms we hold dear as absolute, etc. to feel sovereign, for instance. Self-reliance thus posits a non-possessive and non-domineering kind of agency, one that shuns from fixed hierarchies or totalities such as structural violence. Once again, many have pointed out that nonviolence or ahimsa is ‘the master precept’ in Buddhism.

after the most intense three months of my life (hence the no blogging...but i did send out emails) we're now officially full into final project time, which has become let's-publish-common-ground time and hence group-wide freakout time that i managed to evade for the past week by moving into a politically and socially engaged buddhist commune. however, today i underwent a massive time-space warp and have landed back in the world of student life, of students-of-life life, of needing to produce something concrete which i have learned i completely suck at doing.

i'm writing three articles for this issue of common ground, whose theme is self-reliance: one on the Asoke Buddhism as part of a global back-to-the-basics movement, one on the squats in Nijmegen where i stayed when i ran away from school last February, and one on bridging the language gap between policy makers and people who are negatively affected by their policies for development. the last one is my baby, my brain child, and will hopefully become my thesis for graduation in december. if i get my act together. or more like if i act like a real student again. i've been sort of playing the role of "i'll do whatever the group needs" and sacrificing my own needs that are separate from the group...hence having three drafts due in four days that will each require seemingly impossible collaboration, and the diminishing of my own project. ah well. i don't know what the hell i'm going to do with it anyway. it was going to be sort of a survey project, and then became an actual cartographic project, and now i don't know if i have time for either in a sufficient manner. i guess that's what i get for living in a vortex, and subsuming my own interests. but i'm glad the publication will have what it needs.

hm, i don't know what else is interesting...i might be going to learn earthen building and integrated agriculture north of chiang mai after the program...also i am wondering if it would really every be possible for a vagabond life to fulfill me...

can anyone explain to me why naked lunch is worth reading? i read fifty pages and then gave up in favor of some more orwell...

ben valentine came to visit! then i looked at pictures of tom, melissa, robbie, drew, and others abouts all over europe and it freaked me out that w e  a r e  e v e r y w h e r e... alright fine insufficiently pensive at 3am.

Currently Reading Finding George Orwell in Burma By Emma Larkin see related

Bangkok, Round 4