If consciousness is
a part of nature,
then whose is it?
Or, again, whose isn’t it?
Flowers that have been pollinated manifest changes—in shape, color patterns—that bees recognize; they move past these flowers, conserving time and energies, seeking nectar elsewhere, pollinating other flowers along their way.
Birds fly in flocks, swoop and swirl and find their way, together.
Synergies, sympathetic correspondences of consciousness at work.
Late in his long life of study, practice and reflection, Shinran wrote of ji nen, naturalness, things working in and of themselves, in concert with all else—he said ji nen was at the heart of true awakening, thus not ours alone to claim.
This same principle of naturalness, the very same Chinese characters, was taught by early Taoist masters as well.
The eminent Buddhist scholar, Hisao Inagaki once referred to Amida as a “person.” When asked how myth, a fiction, could be a “person,” he clarified: myth does not mean not real; it means reality of a different order.
Amida then, Life itself, the working of the universe itself, is “person” in that it is the source of “personhood,” the foundation of everything we recognize as person or self, specifically including consciousness—so reality itself is our real self and, furthermore, might readily, even best, be understood, all reality that is, not as “what,” but as “who.”
Think of the differences implied in this stance with respect to the world at large, where hierarchies of differentiated objects fall silent in the face of the all-embracing call and response song of unlimited relations and friends.
Kyōshin Samuels
Jishin
matthew1263
Wamae
Jerry Bolick
dumbbonbu
Seidō
Hi Jerry, this reminded me of a line in one of William Stafford’s poems: “we are all gestures that the world makes.”
Stafford refused to align himself with a particular religious tradition (although he recognized Quaker roots, tried to follow nonviolence to levels not ordinarily seen or understood), and rather allowed religious sensibilities to arise as they might–we would say, ji nen, for sure, an Other Power follower for sure; but for him, without carrying the weight of the terminology.
“Just a life” he wrote, of his own, near its end–no more, no less, I would say.
One great teacher.
Dear Jerry,
Your reflections on the meaning of “Person” immediately reminded me of a wonderful talk give by DT Suzuki which can found in the book ‘Essence of Buddhism”. He speaks about the meaning of “personification” in relation to the “Great Compassion” which we know as Amida Buddha. He concludes by saying:
“Amida is not a concept personified as is usually understood. He is ground from which all spiritual revelations grow and to which all personalties are related”.
Again thank you Jerry for another “Note to Myself”. I hope there will be many more!
Gassho
Jishin
Jishin, thanks for your comments, and the reference to Suzuki–I hope to be able to get Notes out on a somewhat regular basis. It’s been a life time habit of mine to underline and write notes in the margins of books I’m reading, my way of engaging in a conversation with the author, an important part of the learning process for me–
–as much as possible, I’d like Notes to be an extension of that, rather than merely an expository exercise. It’s the exploration and the endless possibilities that excite me most–it’s got something to do too, I suspect, with many years’ exposure to reading and trying to write/capture/make poems.
Seems like I discover so many wonderful things in my reading, it’s a shame not to share them to some extent, especially in this modern age of informal, unrestrained publishing/correspondence…
Incidentally, the impetus for this last entry was an article on women poets and nature, in the latest issue of “The American Poetry Review.” Many poets, past and present, have a very insightful way of being in the world–there’s a lot to learn out there.
Gassho,
Jerry