Without a Doubt

To Know Without a Doubt

Often we hear people talk of knowing something, then they say without a doubt.  In many schools of thought, knowledge is acquired when doubts have come to a resolution as they are investigated to the point they become the most likely explanation over the previous assumption or knowledge.  Then there is the other school of thought which selects something that is desired to be true and then continues by denying all doubt that could interfere with that knowledge.    The latter often finds similar believing people banding together to strengthen each other in the face of difficult to explain knowledge they have chosen to defend.  The first school band together, too  but have a practice of constantly questioning, although it is not unheard of to have the same sort of groupthink occur at times but it is not the standard mo.  As everything and everyone is natural I won't say which one is better,  I can only say which one has led to less suffering for me.

I can't justify something as true without fully analyzing both sides and determining a most likely cause according to my observations.  I am one of the people in this world who should not let his feelings go unquestioned and so I can't claim knowledge by a feeling. Of course many would argue no one should do anything of great importance solely on a feeling but that is not the point of this post.  The fact is I am left with observation as the most reliable means of acquiring knowledge.  To tell me to refrain from doubt is a line used by many,  some of the most dangerous of which are swindlers and salesmen. 

Is it possible to say one knows something if one refuses to examine the contrary points objectively?  To realize the same arguments used for propping up one's own belief should be applied to other belief systems and see if they also legitimize something we don't believe in?  This would mean we would question our own methods of course, because if your method is flawed,  then there is a high likelyhood of a flawed result.  If someone in almost every culture has near death experiences that reflect their cultural/religious view then what can we draw from that?  If people from several religions testify they know without a doubt theirs is true, how do you choose between them if you can't trust feelings?  Could it be investigating doubts until you have determined one of them matches the observable universe without relying on subjective information?

Belief in something is a pretty universal trait in our species.  We can't get around it, so personally I don't believe in judging those who do.  Do they create more suffering for themselves from that course?  Well,  that is for them to investigate and decide.  Personally, I have reduced a lot for myself by looking for the root causes of things as pertains to me.  Of course this more often than not leads back to me and expectations I have that are not rooted in anything factual, but rather deceptive feelings.  Once a feeling is recognized as deceptive though, it can be processed.  I can analyze it, try to find the root of it, and realize there is no monster in the room after all when I finally turn the light on.

Clinging to Permanance

The rock in the stream has the illusion of permanence, as does the mountain, the valley, the forest, the air, the sun, the moon, and the oceans, yet they are not.  To build a house on a rock is merely to place something that is impermanent onto something else that is impermanent, albeit slower, the end is ultimately the same. The earthquake destroys the rock and sun and tempests destroy the house no matter where it is built.

This week has been a rough one for clinging.  Churches cling to dogma like their existence depends on it.  Love is a word used to describe segregation and make people feel like what they might view as wrong is right, clinging to the firm belief in righteous permanence.  Permanence is what makes us think we continue to be right unflinchingly as the world changes around us, begins to criticize us, and we in turn deem it persecution because we are right,  permanently, like a rock.  I think to seek security in permanence is a form of mindlessness (mindlessness is not stupidity, to me it is more a cessation of self awareness or self determination).  To close the mind to new interpretations.  To doubt our doubts, to shut off thought, isn't this but an illusion of security in the end?

A baby clings to the permanence it believes is it's Mother.  A grown up might cling to a person who claims they literally speak to God for you, and then slowly mutate their image of God to what the man describes.  A merciful God who fulfilled the Mosaic law can become an unmerciful one bent on enforcing rituals, ordinances, and such.  The names don't change, but the content does, this is calling impermanence permanence but it is difficult to believe that impermanence is permanence if one is mindful and considers all sides and history of an issue and looks at results.  Christ taught that by their fruits ye shall know them.  Very wise advice.  Incidentally, fruit is a very impermanent thing, in constant change..

I don't believe these people are bad or inferior, I believe it is a natural part of being human.  Our position on the food chain is dictated by our ability to band together.  There are many ways humans band together and select their leaders.  There is no way not to be a natural man.  Religion is natural,  is there a time that human's have not had it?  Are there not religions all over the earth with members loudly proclaiming they know it is true,  and in some cases even killing themselves to show the depth of their conviction?  Even many animals have instincts which could be construed as a distant relative of religion.  I can't tell you that the people are unhappy or happy as a result, that is something only they know.

When we delegate our mindfulness to others,   we give them authority over us, that in itself can be a problem.  Conversely, it's human nature to have power go to your head and get caught up in it even if you originally started out as the altruistic rebel trying to topple the tyranny and dogma.  Sooner or later the rebel discovers the usefulness of dogma and we are back where we started.

In the end we are all connected.  Those who desire, those who attempt to minimize it, those who embrace the concept of permanence, those who come to grips with the aspects of impermanence,  we will all come to the same end.  We will all mix our atoms with the earth and more largely the universe.  There is no way not to be part of it.  Some of us will be more successful in limiting the impact of suffering and some won't, by chance, or by choice.  Understanding the nature of impermanence, I will err on the side of causing as little suffering as I can.

Ponderizing the Bi-Annual Instructions.

Conference weekend.   Admittedly I didn't see a whole lot of it I confess.  I did see a few sessions though.  It is interesting watching from the outside.  I find it amazing how different something can appear between when you believe in the man talking and when you don't.
 
On the subject of doubt for instance, Buddha encouraged doubt of even his own teachings, much of what I heard this conference was about avoiding doubt.  Ignoring doubt.  Stifling doubt.  Before I flipped I would have heard this as encouragement to stay the course.  I would have considered ignoring doubt a place of safety, by denying anything different from what I believed as lies, I could rest confident in what I knew.   This was a very difficult position to maintain as I tend to observe patterns in organizations and behaviors in comparison to their actions and think about them so the cognitive dissonance was becoming very painful.
 
So, back to doubt.  Can a mind truly be free of deception without it?  If one is not allowed to verify, how does one keep from being conned or taken in or running willy nilly with every rumor flying around their facebook feeds and email accounts?  How is one to be truly mindful if one restricts the bounds of the mind?

On another level, presumably the reason for this doubt is the attainment of something after this life which is permanent, requiring us to pass a test beset with logical stumbling blocks constantly placed in our way to the point that nothing we believe is independently verifiable or else we should not have faith.  I have observed nothing permanent in my life as of yet and the scientific jury would say there is really not anything that is permanent.  How can one know something without doubt?  Knowledge without verification is a guess.  But perhaps I am falling victim to the error of the faithless.

In any case, when feelings aren't to be trusted and emotions distracting, what is left but doubt to gain a good direction? To question, to investigate, to confirm before we embark on the next leg of our journey? 

Where Can I Turn for Peace?

Lots of talk about trial and suffering and peace in Sunday School.  All the answers were external of course except for prayer,  prayer is almost a hybrid between external and internal and can arguably be called a form of meditation.  There was talk of the temple bringing peace and this caused me to think.  I have indeed found the temple to be a peaceful place.   The question of course is,  was this because that was a place I stopped to meditate and think about things other than the day to day tasks,  or due to some real outside influence?

Back in the day I would feel the same peace just before drifting off to sleep after saying my prayers, and admittedly, even without the latter I still feel the same thing when drifting off.  I often get the same peace sitting on the zafu (meditation cushion),  or even taking a moment off to the side to slow down and meditate.  I am no longer continually chasing peace as a result of  continuing the constant mutual reassurances among the group  telling each other it is true and brings peace.   Well,  whether it is true/factual or not, I don't find that all the constant meetings and the constant visiting people to checkup on them once a month and getting constantly harangued about not doing more has brought me peace.  I find that the more honest I become with myself in this matter, the more peace I feel.

Of course, this places me in opposition to my tribe.  I am the sore thumb.  I am the one sitting in the congregation smiling up at the leaders on the stand with their responsible scowls.  One thing I will say for Elder Perry,  he had a smile on his face and he looked happy,  even when he was on the stand. I don't know what the scowl means.  It might just be their "stand" face, I have seen them smiling elsewhere.  It is not for me to speculate if they are truly happy, at peace,  or being dishonest with themselves.  I am honest with myself and I have peace.  Happiness comes, trial comes, satisfaction comes, hardship comes, there is want,  there is need, there is plenty  all of this is fine.  It's what is and I accept that.  People are what they are.  If they want to know what helps me,  I will tell them,  but I will not push them to do anything,  I am no expert in their life,  their experiences, their desires,  their passions, their sufferings, that is a position only they hold.  I am satisfied and at peace being me.

Question Everything

“Do not believe in anything simply because you have heard it. Do not believe in anything simply because it is spoken and rumored by many. Do not believe in anything simply because it is found written in your religious books. Do not believe in anything merely on the authority of your teachers and elders. Do not believe in traditions because they have been handed down for many generations. But after observation and analysis, when you find that anything agrees with reason and is conducive to the good and benefit of one and all, then accept it and live up to it.”

Siddhartha Gautama-Buddha

I thought of this quote on Sunday.  I can't really remember what the speakers talked about.   I remember disagreeing with much of it.  Primarily I noticed that things they talked about in the beginning of their talks contradicted the endings somewhat.  Sometimes I think in this life we get into an "Emperors New Clothes" mentality.  We learn to think that the 1st modus operandi for us is to not question those we view as being in authority.  The Milgram experiments and many that follow can illuminate quite a bit on the dangers of this.  There is not a lot of direction in the New Testament about following your leaders even when they are wrong.  There is quite a bit about having an internal moral compass and reigning condemnation on those in authority.  

Anyway,  I digress.  I find a different world through observation and questioning.  Questioning motives, questioning logic, questioning reasons,  questioning results, and questioning authority.  My results personally have come out on a different side than everyone else's.   Sometimes I was right sometimes they were.  Logic dictates that authority should always be right if they are to always be followed without question.  So there is an issue there.   I was torn in two ways for a long time and I am coming to understand why.  If you have the same perspective  as your leaders do, then it is easier to be happy patting each other on the back in your common view.  If your revelation differs from others fairly regularly?  Well that makes life difficult in a world when everyone is supposed to have revelation but the revelation is only true if it matches the next in line of authority whose revelation is only true if it is in line with the next in line in authority and so on.  

So I am left questioning, in an effort to continue in a path of inner peace and contentment.   Not that there aren't hiccups.  There are just no longer 95% hiccups and are now closer to 5% hiccups.  I can sit in church and allow myself to disagree,  I can serve where I see a need for service,  I can be free to choose to be good for good's sake in a way I am capable of,  in a sustainable way considering my circumstances, in a genuine way, not a way that requires fighting myself and creating inner discord.

So through questioning I begin to understand.  Through questioning and allowing myself to accept the answer and not dismissing it as wrong because someone else thinks it is, I find truth may be hard to stomach at times, but it usually brings about peace once accepted.  Peace that comes from within constantly replenishes when accepted for what it is and desire doesn't interfere.  As opposed to peace that comes from without,  which can be variable as we move through the various situations of life.

you say I enjoy what?

Church recently has been all about what to do on the Sabbath day.  This is often hard for me to resolve because God rested on the Sabbath and supposedly he is the example,  It doesn't mention anything about meetings or Lords work.  Christ said the Sabbath is for man and not the other way around.  One of the things that finally pushed me off the ledge so to speak was being told what would bring me rest on the Sabbath and that always left me feeling mentally exhausted from the weekend on Monday.  In a word it sounds like doublespeak to me.  Anyway,  it eventually wore me down and now I realize what others think might be best for me might not actually be so and the world is not binary.
So how does this correlate to Buddhism?  I suppose I was suffering and lieing to myself saying I wasn't.  If desire causes suffering what was the desire here?  I suppose a desire to reach the point where all this provided fulfillment, the arrival,  the promised peace I was supposed to have but never seemed to reach.
Another take on it is mindfullness.   Yes mindfullness.  I think the issue here was delegating my mindfullness to someone else and not analyzing the true issue instead of being told what my issues were by someone whose authority I took without question.   Hmmm,  seems like I've heard this challenge to question attributed to buddhist teaching somewhere.  With no exceptions implied,  one is encouraged to even question the teachings of Buddha himself.  Do mindfullness and questioning go together?
I think mindfullness and questioning have everything to do with each other.  So I guess, as I sit in church every Sunday questioning what is being said, I am being mindfull.  Am I right in containing my questioning to myself so as to not antagonize others? I think so.   That would be loving kindness.
So, I do not find meetings restfull inasmuch as I am not with my family.  I do not consider staring into a computer screen a good portion of the day to digitize the names of someone long dead from a hard to read historical document restfull either.  Staring at a screen and documents is what I do all week,  it is not rest or rejuvinating in the slightest.  I do admit that it might be for some though and I will not criticize anyone who finds it so.  Anyway,  those are my thoughts.  I need to be mentally rejuvinated after the weekend, and it turns out, when I approach it mindully I come up with a much different set of activities.  It's a small wonder I got as far as I did.

Comfort in Knowing

I spend my life among a people who take strength in the concept of knowing what will happen.  Not necessarily what is about to happen, but what will happen after death.  This life is somehow tolerable if we have hope all will be made right after.  I don't really wish to discuss whether there is a life after this one or not.  Only to muse on why it is so critical that we know exactly what lies beyond in order to be happy.

Many is the meeting I have sat through where people have expressed gratitude that they aren't like the other people who don't know what they know about the afterlife.  People become very preoccupied with death being the end.  Why would not having anything after this life matter so much?  We would cease feeling pain.  Why the preoccupation with needing our identity to continue forever? It's an interesting question.

It seems to me that if we continue, fine, but if not,  we likely will not be aware that we don't exist as a sentient being anymore.  Either way is not so bad in my mind.  Why all the insecurity?  Perhaps it is part of our biology to worry about death and the self.  A survival instinct? 

As Mormons we place an incredible amount of importance on living forever.   Our family's living forever,  Our entire family's right back to the first person.  It becomes a lot of people fairly quickly.  I often wonder about the scalability.  Anyway,  not here to question doctrine, only the preoccupation with permanence.  Why do so many religions worry so much about what happens after death, and how are the ones that don't worry so much about it different?

In some ways when a religion dictates what awaits you forever,  or even just in the next life,  they hold a certain power over you.  If a belief system places more emphasis on happiness now, I would guess it would be easier to verify if it is working for you as you would either be happy or not so much.  Leadership then becomes a lot like herding cats, if everyone can judge for themselves. 

If a person no longer fears death or a negative hereafter, there is a much reduced ability to control them.   Impermanence can be a very liberating feeling.  Even though acknowledgement of impermanence ties us all together, in another way it also frees us to be what we are and not what would be dictated to us.  It allows us to live in the now, to experience the present and not disappear into concerns for the future or regrets from the past.