So the last blog began with a conversation about ‘mess’ at the Wat and ended with an ah-haaaa moment about me understanding(ish) a path to make my heart neutral; to see not mess but  a pile of stuff without judgment or bother. But, there is a bit more to the story. A few contemplations, conversations and inputs that really helped me get there. So, although this a twist and turn in my timeline, in this blog I will share an email conversation between Neecha and I that took place after the conversation at the Wat about ‘mess’ that I mentioned in the beginning of the last blog, but before my contemplation about neutrality that followed managed to take shape (i.e the end of the last blog). I offer it here to show a kind of bridge in my thinking, one example of the inputs that helped get me from something my teachers say to something I can actually process and understand.

Alana’s Email to Neecha asking 2 questions:

1) I wanted to submit a general question for the video Q and A if you guys think its appropriate (if not then maybe you and Mae Yo just have a few thoughts for me) . The question in general is if Mae Yo can talk a little about the role of “what we are familiar with/used to” plays in our lives and more specifically in our continued rebirth. It seems to me a really important underpinning for how we view with and interact in the world. Yet, in my own observation its kind of “silent” it lurks in the background as a kind of unspoken standard…

2) I wanted to share a few specifics of my own contemplation on the topic as well as ask for a little guidance in a place I am stuck. I have contemplated this topic a lot in the past, mostly in relation to the 8 worldly conditions and comparison.I guess I felt like I kinda understood it, but then I was at a concert of a jazz singer I really like last weekend and I noticed that before each song I kept hoping she would play one I knew. The first few cords I was filled with hope, and then, when I realized I didn’t know the song, first I was disappointed, then I started trying to find things that were familiar–oh she uses the same cords, or its the same theme as this other song I like, etc.

It really struck me that something so small as if I knew a song effected my enjoyment so much, and for each new song, it was the old songs that I knew that helped me judge the likability of what is new. I don’t know quite why but the experience was a powerful one — like I caught a glimpse of my own standard setting, my own building of identity, of belonging, of relating to stuff around me  in real time.

I have already started thinking about this in terms of the aggregates as well as self and self belonging. Also, I am thinking a lot about the idea of preservation and how it relates to what we are used to. There is one thing that I’m a little stuck on — when things aren’t “as good as” what I’m familiar with I’m disappointed, but sometime, if I perceive them as better than what is familiar I am happy. I notice there is a limit to this–food can be too rich, houses too big, clothing too fancy –still though there is seemingly some acceptance for a creep “above” what I’m used to but not really much room below. I understand my own imagination creates the yard stick based on my past experiences…still, I’m a little surprised that it doesn’t go both ways (actually I’m less surprised than that I think I have a major wrong view lurking here and I can’t quite pin it down).

My suspicion arises based on the direction my contemplation on preservation have taken me. I have noticed that a major personality trait of mine is that I seek to preserve what I have, things, feelings, relationships, beauty, fitness, health. I’m not necessarily a person that wants or seeks more, I’d rather just “guard” whats “mine”. But sometimes I get more  (this has been especially true with money in the past few years) and when I do, my standards shift, more becomes the thing I am used to and also the new thing I need to guard. I guess the thought that resonated with me most is that if my goal is to preserve then getting more is actually a bad thing–its more work, more to guard, its more painful to lose. Still, I am willing to accept above my standards/what I am used to, even though its so much riskier and harder, than to accept below. Its on this bit of crazy that I wonder if you or Mae Yo have any guidance or gentle nudging for my own thoughts, I would love to hear them.

Neecha’s Reply:

What we are familiar with is super important. It leads us to define happiness and dissatisfaction, which in turn leads to to desire to be reborn a certain way- either to continue to encounter what we are pleased with, or to have another try, only this time not having to face the things we were displeased with. As Mae Yo often talks about, we are reborn because we either desire it, or because we are being forced into it. We can desire more of the pleasant or less of the unpleasant, but either way, we will be reborn because of it. And whether we are forced by karmic debts or willingly reborn, once reborn, we will encounter more of the pleasant and unpleasant, and continue this endless cycle of “I want more of this” and “I don’t want to be like this anymore.” Each of those wants is a “bhava” or becoming, another attempt, another lifetime. That’s what we are trying to cut out by seeing the TTP (suffering) of the things we’re pleased and displeased with in life. And we measure being pleased or displeased based on what we are accustomed to, so it’s super crucial to understand sanya (#3) and how it works, how it affects us, what its TTP(suffering)  are.

Being ok with a slight upgrade but not ok with a slight downgrade is normal. It’s cause is nothing to dig too deep into, because it’s just a natural part of this world, we are all like that. Just like how everything comes with two sides, and one side is considered preferable.  Preferable is perceived personal benefit, while not preferable is perceived personal loss. As you know, how we perceive the outcome can also change, given new info or as time passes. What we see is an upgrade now can be perceived as a downgrade a week later. The main thing here to see how #3 (memory) works in defining good or bad, where did you start thinking it was good or bad to start with, how permanent or impermanent are those labels anyhow, how much TTP is involved in maintaining that yardstick of yours.

For instance, I never really noticed or cared about how people held their spoons when they ate. I traced it back to a mother and daughter who seemed to have it all together. They had the newest toys, the newest clothes, they were like trendsetters. And since I was younger than the daughter, she seemed so smart to me. When she told me I held my spoon in a barbaric way, I re-positioned my hand to hold it in the “proper” way, and started noticing they way others held theirs. Soon, I was labeling people as barbaric and refined. Those judgments affected how I viewed their other actions, how I treated them. When I realized this attitude came from such an arbitrary cause (the point is to eat, who cares how you hold the spoon), that it was completely conditional (would everyone agree that holding the spoon in X way was superior to Y), the idea lost its foundation, it couldn’t be maintained anymore. This is how we destroy the bonds in our memories. By seeing the harm caused as we strive to reinforce them, and the nature of how they were formed and perceived in the first place.

Alana Reads Neecha’s Blog: http://neecha.kpyusa.org/blog/subway/ — OK, blog Neecha wrote on fairness is one of those really important, timely, inputs that helped me shift my thinking. I am linking it here and suggesting you give it a read for context in my final reply,

Alana’s Reply:

Sometimes I get the feeling I’m sorta grasping around a topic, but can’t quite find the entry point.  Anyway, this plus your recent Subway blog actually helped a lot! You sort of freed me from being zoomed-in on the upgrade/downgrade thing and I was able to look a little more closely at a close cousin…neutrality. Or, more specifically, the causes for my being bias in one direction or another rather than being neutral to something (which is a state that would cause less suffering if I could just get there and which would uproot the potential for that thing to propel me forward any further).  

A while back, at the Wat, we were talking about the “mess” on the table. About how, even though we understood that our #3s were the benchmark for the  judgement (#4) of the “messiness” and even though we recognized the discomfort it caused us and possible future perils of the judgement as well, it was hard not to really imagine it as a mess in that moment. It was hard to be neutral to the pile of stuff on the table as being just that, a pile of stuff. I sort of ended-up setting this contemplation a side for a little while because I wasn’t getting anywhere…

When I look at my jazz night out though, I see the situation so much more clearly — the songs are just a jumble of notes and lyrics. I see them as enjoyable or not just based on my own familiarity (3) (somehow this is a clearer example to me then stuff on a table, even though I think its the exact same thing). I then used my imagination , drawing parallels of her old songs to her new  to create new memories, new songs that I can like/be failure with/judge against in the future. Suddenly it just seems kind of silly that I could think some note combos are absolutely great (clean) and others are absolutely bad (messy), particularly when my yard stick is my own creating and i’m continually manipulating the notches on it as well.

The funny thing is, when I really think about my jazz story, I know the origins just like you did with the spoons. Its got to do with my job. I know this Jazz singer because my org. has presented her several times. Since I started this job, I feel like I’m “in the know”, especially about musicians we have presented before.  Its an identity I have developed in part because I felt like it would help me be successful with this job, also to “justify” the reasons I enjoy it and the things it gives me. Plus, I really respect the taste of our ED and it is she who has chosen to present this artist multiple times. When I didn’t know the songs she sang, a part of me felt like my identity as “in the know” was threatened, since clearly, I didn’t know. All the issues I was solving for by creating the identity were challenged and it made me uncomfortable. Combine that with the tendency to prefer what is familiar and I felt dissatisfaction and the need to quickly adjust, to build new memories so in the future I would be in the know again. Ironically, if I were a different kind of person, someone who valued being exposed to new things (which is just a different kind of familiarity, begin familiar with whats new) the concert would have been awesome to my ear and reinforced my sense of being a new edgy person.

Anyway, I’m sort of writing and thinking real time, so this is a bit scattered. I think however this is a topic I will consider more and I am grateful in the nudge you gave me to get here. It seems like a lot of my practice these days lies in my second guessing myself, chipping at my previously held assumptions by looking more closely about how they arise and what purpose I believe they serve (usually they do a pretty half-assed job serving their supposed purpose) . I think I had been taking familiarity/ what I was used to as a logical given truth, something it was safe to base my beliefs and judgments on. I see how important it is to chip away at this,since, it is kind of crazy to think some notes and words are good/bad in their essence.