I did a lot of inner work on developing the capacity for embodying identities that do not necessarily contain what one would call "me, in the here and now; the person who is living this life, in this body, in this mind", i.e. a normal, conventional identity.
So, as is typical for spiritual practices I spent time to center the experience of my identity in other humans (and animals; and inanimate objects; and in concepts), or in other versions of myself, or in my future self, or in "humanity 1000 years from now", or the planet, or whatever. An enlightening (and freeing) experience.
I also did extensive meditations on the deadly sins, how they manifest in different personality types, and so on.
However, it never occured to me to connect these sins with a kind of global identity, and by that have them turn into a more positive version of themselves: "[Vajra] greed is for everyone to possess whatever they want" is an AMAZING idea! I can't believe this never occured to me (prideful of me to assume that any good idea would already have occured to me, eh? :D ). The same with the other qualities you listed there.
The whole article was interesting. I enjoy reading about your concept of nobility. And I never considered LOTR from this lens, so that was valuable as well.
But especially that last part is giving me literal (as literal as it can be in the cognitive realm) food for thought. Thank you for that. :)
And also, you note that Tolkien based his notions of nobility in the Christian tradition, which of course also seems increasingly less real. As Nietzsche presciently lamented, the death of God hit us hard, and we're far from having dealt with it. A perspective that I haven't previously thought of, is that the ascendant secular "progressive" ideology inherited the notion of virtue from Christianity, but overlooked nobility.
AFAICT, David's point is that this stuff used to be common knowledge, but in the context of a less complex world, and the patterns in which it manifested have become discredited and obsolete. So, if civilization isn't to collapse under the weight of its confusions and contradictions, nobility needs to be rediscovered/reinvented in a way that's compatible with post-modernity.
This discussion of vajra pride is so “right place, right time, right audience.” Pennies from heaven dropping right and left. Ngak’chang Rinpoche’s evocation of “playing air guitar “ as a a common yidam practice lit up anew, with added wattage. Remembering how as a bookish child, I went around in a book’s mandala for awhile before reinhabiting the quotidian.
And that last little gem about “vajra idiocy”— TOTALLY relatable for this space cadet, and grateful tears for NCR’s baffling repeated assertions that he is a “moron,” which served as a koan for all this time.
> Remembering how as a bookish child, I went around in a book’s mandala for awhile before reinhabiting the quotidian.
I still get an effect that sounds similar, from particularly affecting fiction. All of experience seems magically perfumed with the feeling-tone of the book (or movie, or game) for a while afterwards. Sometimes days, even!
"And therefore, we cannot manifest nobility in quite the same way that fictional characters can. But we can be inspired, and find qualities worthy of emulation. We might make a deliberate practice of that."
So fruitful!
To make a practice of being inspired and aspiring to worthy goals / qualities. It's that straightforward, which is not to say it's simple. It can be difficult because one cannot will oneself to aspire or to be inspired. Such emotional states are spontaneous, and can be difficult to maintain. The best we seem to be able to do is to will ourselves into states of mind and situations in which we are more openly receptive to inspiration / aspiration.
Deity yoga always reminds me of the sect of Protestantism I was born into. Everyone is told Jesus is in them, and can live through them, in them, as them, and vice versa. The yoga, or union, with Christ is inherent, but faith is required for experience of it. Even the word Christian was meant to be used as “little Christs.”
The concept of vajra + negative emotion is fascinating -- generating the vajra versions requires some intuition that seems really foundational.
--
nit: When reading the turning point paragraph where you call arrogance a "confusion", I stumbled a bit, because I was expecting a clearer refutation:
> Deity yoga is traditionally considered risky. This is its main risk: confusing ofermōd—arrogance—with vajra pride. That is Satanic, nearly enough. But it is a confusion.
Suggestions to make the refutation clearer:
- "That *would be* Satanic" instead of "That *is* Satanic" or otherwise merging this with the former sentence
- Using a stronger, more generic refuting word than "confusion" - which is being used in a particular context that a non-buddhist-teacher might misinterpret
- Make the first sentence more clearly the refutation, demoting the current first sentence to a secondary connection rather than the topic.
Example edit:
> Confusing ofermōd—arrogance—with vajra pride *would be* Satanic, nearly enough. Deity yoga is traditionally considered risky for its possible confusions, and this is its main confusion. But vajra pride is not Satanic.
I did a lot of inner work on developing the capacity for embodying identities that do not necessarily contain what one would call "me, in the here and now; the person who is living this life, in this body, in this mind", i.e. a normal, conventional identity.
So, as is typical for spiritual practices I spent time to center the experience of my identity in other humans (and animals; and inanimate objects; and in concepts), or in other versions of myself, or in my future self, or in "humanity 1000 years from now", or the planet, or whatever. An enlightening (and freeing) experience.
I also did extensive meditations on the deadly sins, how they manifest in different personality types, and so on.
However, it never occured to me to connect these sins with a kind of global identity, and by that have them turn into a more positive version of themselves: "[Vajra] greed is for everyone to possess whatever they want" is an AMAZING idea! I can't believe this never occured to me (prideful of me to assume that any good idea would already have occured to me, eh? :D ). The same with the other qualities you listed there.
The whole article was interesting. I enjoy reading about your concept of nobility. And I never considered LOTR from this lens, so that was valuable as well.
But especially that last part is giving me literal (as literal as it can be in the cognitive realm) food for thought. Thank you for that. :)
Reading how this made sense for you was super interesting—thank you!
This nobility arch is great. Sometimes when I read it, I feel like this is/was/should be common knowledge. (I know those contradict, I'm confused).
Thoughts on this?
Yes, this is a bit puzzling! "We all know what a Good King is," I wrote in a previous episode—from playing video games, if nothing else.
And yet, as @Xpym noted, nobility no longer seems real. It's mostly considered *only* a fantasy.
So pointing out that it can be a live possibility seems helpful.
And also, you note that Tolkien based his notions of nobility in the Christian tradition, which of course also seems increasingly less real. As Nietzsche presciently lamented, the death of God hit us hard, and we're far from having dealt with it. A perspective that I haven't previously thought of, is that the ascendant secular "progressive" ideology inherited the notion of virtue from Christianity, but overlooked nobility.
Yes, that seems right!
AFAICT, David's point is that this stuff used to be common knowledge, but in the context of a less complex world, and the patterns in which it manifested have become discredited and obsolete. So, if civilization isn't to collapse under the weight of its confusions and contradictions, nobility needs to be rediscovered/reinvented in a way that's compatible with post-modernity.
Thank you, yes!
He's doing his best for making this common knowledge! He's magnificently, even NOBLY, generous in that way.
This discussion of vajra pride is so “right place, right time, right audience.” Pennies from heaven dropping right and left. Ngak’chang Rinpoche’s evocation of “playing air guitar “ as a a common yidam practice lit up anew, with added wattage. Remembering how as a bookish child, I went around in a book’s mandala for awhile before reinhabiting the quotidian.
And that last little gem about “vajra idiocy”— TOTALLY relatable for this space cadet, and grateful tears for NCR’s baffling repeated assertions that he is a “moron,” which served as a koan for all this time.
Glad this resonated for you!
> Remembering how as a bookish child, I went around in a book’s mandala for awhile before reinhabiting the quotidian.
I still get an effect that sounds similar, from particularly affecting fiction. All of experience seems magically perfumed with the feeling-tone of the book (or movie, or game) for a while afterwards. Sometimes days, even!
"And therefore, we cannot manifest nobility in quite the same way that fictional characters can. But we can be inspired, and find qualities worthy of emulation. We might make a deliberate practice of that."
So fruitful!
To make a practice of being inspired and aspiring to worthy goals / qualities. It's that straightforward, which is not to say it's simple. It can be difficult because one cannot will oneself to aspire or to be inspired. Such emotional states are spontaneous, and can be difficult to maintain. The best we seem to be able to do is to will ourselves into states of mind and situations in which we are more openly receptive to inspiration / aspiration.
Deity yoga always reminds me of the sect of Protestantism I was born into. Everyone is told Jesus is in them, and can live through them, in them, as them, and vice versa. The yoga, or union, with Christ is inherent, but faith is required for experience of it. Even the word Christian was meant to be used as “little Christs.”
*fireworks and applause*
No YOU 🙂
This is such a great series/arc – thanks again!
The concept of vajra + negative emotion is fascinating -- generating the vajra versions requires some intuition that seems really foundational.
--
nit: When reading the turning point paragraph where you call arrogance a "confusion", I stumbled a bit, because I was expecting a clearer refutation:
> Deity yoga is traditionally considered risky. This is its main risk: confusing ofermōd—arrogance—with vajra pride. That is Satanic, nearly enough. But it is a confusion.
Suggestions to make the refutation clearer:
- "That *would be* Satanic" instead of "That *is* Satanic" or otherwise merging this with the former sentence
- Using a stronger, more generic refuting word than "confusion" - which is being used in a particular context that a non-buddhist-teacher might misinterpret
- Make the first sentence more clearly the refutation, demoting the current first sentence to a secondary connection rather than the topic.
Example edit:
> Confusing ofermōd—arrogance—with vajra pride *would be* Satanic, nearly enough. Deity yoga is traditionally considered risky for its possible confusions, and this is its main confusion. But vajra pride is not Satanic.