Mind - fullness and Meditation

My mind is definitely full. There is no space for anything else - no spare memory. Indeed it is so full that I have to resort to a diary and 2 different types of calendar, plus an ever changing list in a notebook, plus "Post It's" in obvious places. No one has yet devised an external hard drive or memory stick that I can plug in to me.

Sometimes I feel that there are just too many things going on in my life at the same time. I would like some down time. I would love a notebook empty of reminders of things I have to do & things I'm waiting for others to do. It never happens. As I cross things off new ones are added. How can retirement be so busy and demanding?

I have books to read and paintings to paint. At this rate I won't live long enough!

Therefore the idea of Meditation to quieten the mind is very appealing. My brain needs a rest. I don't want to wear it out by perpetual motion. I need it to keep functioning. There is a lot of dross in there clogging up the works. I have been on weekend retreats before, but not Buddhist ones. I did meditate regularly for years, but that was scuppered by the events of 2009.

I have returned from this weekend in a state of complete exhaustion rather than a state of Bliss. I struggled to stay awake in the teachings & the meditation. It's hard working trying to stop your brain from thinking. Try it. There are always thoughts that sneak in & try to kick out any calm.

I usually only meditate for 20 - 30 minutes, so some of the sessions were too long for me. I ended up in pain & very stiff. There were also too many sessions, so we were in the same room for most of the day & evening. I also usually have a focus for the meditation - the breath, a candle flame, a flower, good fortune, loving kindness.... These were just like switching a light on and off.

Meditation reciting from a liturgy and songs was completely new to me. I liked the repetition of the songs / chants, but the recited liturgy used a whole new vocabulary that I don't understand. It would have been useful to have a dictionary.

I met some nice people & had an interesting time. It's made me want to return to meditation practice.
 
Lama or Guru wanted - willing student. Is there anyone out there?

Shame, Guilt, & Regret

This trio of emotions about things that have happened, whether things we have done, or things we haven't and should have, can be destructive & are certainly negative. Whatever the act of commission or omission, it is done, in the past & can't be undone.

I think I have lived a fairly ordinary life, but I have definitely done things I shouldn't have. Things that probably hurt other people or things that would have hurt them had they known about them. I do regret my human weakness, but not to the extent that it weighs me down, being forever in my thoughts. I think that would be a waste of time & emotion. It wouldn't undo anything. It wouldn't make what I've done any less wrong. It wouldn't make anything right & it wouldn't be positive.

There are only a few things, fortunately, that I now see as shameful. But I don't go around cloaked in guilt. I can regret them happening without that regret ruining my life. As we age we should achieve greater understanding of ourselves & others. If we can learn from our mistakes & become better human beings we develop the skills of sympathy & empathy. We refine our moral code, that nagging thing in our gut that guides our behaviour. The important thing is to acknowledge the action or inaction & the impact of that on others.

Only a few, relatively, have done things so shameful that there is little possibility of forgiveness or redemption. For them we have to find ways of  justice & ways of stopping them from harming others.

Shame, guilt & regret should not be a burden which weighs most of us down & stops us from moving forward freely in a better way. We shouldn't be laden like donkeys. We should be able to trot or gallop onwards. Free spirits able to fly or amble as we chose.

"First do no harm" - Hippocrates. Seems straightforward enough to me, (but not easy to achieve).

Amen to Archbishops - Thank God for Will Hutton.

Readers will know that I do not espouse any of the Abrahamic religions. In fact I have a strong distaste for much of the trappings & beliefs of the established churches. However I do think that we should take the time to read the Archbishops letter, "Who is my Neighbour". I have attached a link to copy & paste below.

https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?ui=2&ik=3050b4a950&view=att&th=14bb186cb82f774e&attid=0.1&disp=safe&zw


Will Hutton is a journalist & writer who I have long admired. I think he is thoughtful and considered & generally has something worthwhile to say. I have reproduced his piece for the Observer.

Observer 22 Feb 2015 – Will Hutton: Don’t condemn the Church. Who else argues for the common good?

There are doubts and debates at the highest level of the civil service about the cost of Trident. On balance, officials and chiefs of staff still support it, not least because cancellation would irrevocably remove one of the last props of Britain’s great-power status. But the case is not open and shut. The cost verges on the impossible, with unpalatable and irrational choices forced on the rest of our military capability to pay for a weapon system that will never be used. It is closer to a 51/49 call than the wider debate recognises.

Yet when the Church of England’s bishops urge that the question be publicly discussed as part of a grownup debate about the future of our country and the quest for the common good, they are dismissed by right-of-centre commentators, Tory MPs and some ministers as a bunch of closet leftists making a political statement. They should get out of politics, and stop making unsolicited interventions like last week’s letter, Who is my neighbour?, directed to the people and parishes of the Church of England.

Read the letter yourself and make your own judgment on whether this is a leftist tract pockmarked with mistakes, or a necessary and compelling intervention from one of the country’s last remaining, if diminished, sources of moral authority. What has moved Anglican leaders to write is the distressing condition of so many of the people that the church encounters in its daily ministry – living, increasingly, in a society of strangers, as the leaders would say, often lonely, uncertain about the prospects of a career or to what extent the social bargain will help them out. The Church of England is one of the last few institutions in touch, through its parishes, with the entire country. Before a general election whose result will be fateful for state and society alike, the bishops feel compelled by their faith to spell out the need for politics to recover the language and conviction of serving the common good.

This is inconvenient for our political leaders, especially for those in government. The majority of the country may no longer have faith, but those who lead the church do – and they remind the rest of us of our forgotten Christian roots. The whole point about Jesus Christ, state the bishops, was that he came to Earth and experienced the human condition before meeting a painful death. “Christians everywhere and throughout the ages,” they write, “have prayed, as part of the Lord’s Prayer, ‘Thy kingdom come, Thy will be done, on Earth as in heaven.’ That is why politics and the life of the Christian disciple cannot be separated. That is why the church calls its members to play a full part in the political life of the nation.”

The Christian quest for “at-oneness”, they argue, with each other and God, can only be achieved in a spirit of respect, neighbourliness and a mutual search for the common good. This means demanding that politics starts addressing big questions – “a richer justification of the state, the purpose of government and a more serious way of talking about taxation”. They accuse the parties of failing to offer “attractive visions of the kind of society and culture they wish to see, or distinctive goals they might pursue. Instead, we are subjected to sterile arguments about who might manage the existing system best. There is no idealism in this prospectus.”

They cite Attlee in 1945 and Thatcher in 1979 as examples of the kind of politics they have in mind – both politicians in their view nuanced in their idealism (Attlee as a statist respecting voluntarism; and Thatcher as a pro-marketeer respecting the social responsibilities of business) as they tried to serve the whole country. Now, however, they suggest, we need a new breadth of vision that can address the problems and realities of today’s Britain. It is not on offer.

The bishops are a last redoubt of moral authority that insists on the primacy of a public realm that serves the common good – for all the pushback from Tory MPs and ministers mocking their emptying churches, accusing them of being left sympathisers or reminding them, as the prime minister did, that growth is bringing the jobs and job security they crave. None of these responses spoke the language of common good, or even accepted it as a premise for political action. We live in a world where the utterances of a Stuart Rose, former-chair of Marks and Spencers, or even private-equity magnate and tax exile Stefano Pessina, about what is good for business – good for mammon – have become the new moral authority.

In his important new book, Mammon’s Kingdom, David Marquand charts the decline of the constituencies and individuals that once joined together, however imperfectly, to act as vital countervailing voices to those of private market interests. Some, like the trade unions, have had decline thrust on them by changed employment laws and economic structures along with media demonisation, but have also not risen to the challenge of changed times with a reframed purpose and rhetoric. Professionals who try to speak for a public interest from a position of disinterest – teachers, doctors, climate-change scientists, social workers, civil servants – are now derided as necessarily money-seeking or partisans. It’s as if everyone knows that everyone else is self-interested, pushing the point of view they hold that benefits them. There is no possible attainable objectivity or impartiality – another reason to abolish the BBC or degrade the civil service. The only objective truth is what might contribute to “wealth generation”.

Centres of local and civic power have been denuded of resource – they might dare to exercise taxing or planning power that a Lord Rose or Mr Pessina would consider anti-business. And lastly, Marquand argues, too many intellectuals, writers and academics seem reluctant to engage in the risks of public argument. And even if they did, the gatekeepers for expression are firmly in the hands of the centre-right consensus. All that is left is organised religion and when it does speak out, as it did last week, it speaks for palpably declining congregations.

Mammon now rules, declares Marquand. But he thinks that the rediscovery of a richer discourse of the common good will necessarily be drawn from religious traditions, even writing as he does as an unbeliever. The bishops have not let him down. They cite Saint Paul’s letter to the Philippians as an inspiration that should bind believers and non-believers. “Whatever is true, whatever is honourable, whatever is just, whatever is pure, whatever is pleasing, whatever is commendable, if there is any excellence and if there is anything worthy of praise, think about these things.” They long, they say, for a more humane society that reflects Saint Paul’s injunction – a better politics for a better nation. 

Amen, you might say, to that.

We each have a responsibility to be well informed about the issues. We have a responsibility to question the politicians we vote for from a knowledge based vantage point. Our votes each count. We cannot abnegate responsibility. If we do, we deserve all that we get. Each of us is powerful when acting together.

This will be a critical election for all sorts of reasons. Make your voice heard above the baying of the politicians.

The Force of Evil

"I used to think that some people were simply good and others were not. Now I think that evil is a force in the world, a force that seeks & finds its way into our lives through anger and loss, through sadness & betrayal, like mould on bread, like rot in an apple, it takes hold". "The Lake of Dreams" - Kim Edwards.

The force of evil seems to be on the ascendancy in our world. Here at home we have increasing numbers of dreadful crimes against children & women. In Europe they are on constant alert against brutal, fundamentalist religious, terrorist attacks. On the high seas pirates capture ships & hapless migrants are left to drown by people who have charged them huge sums of money for the chance of a better life. In the developing world there is abject poverty & communities being preyed on by thuggish militias, not to mention needless death from virulent viruses & contagious diseases. Vicious wars are fought against innocent populations by dictators with no moral compass whatsoever. I could go on....

Where does it end? How do we re-balance a world which seems completely out of alignment? Can we actually stop any of this from happening? Is is as bad as it seems, or is it the negative reporting by the press & media always on the look out for a "good" story?

From my small life experience most people are good at heart, or at least not entirely bad. I think I have only met 3 people that I know behaved truly badly & who I wouldn't want to have anything to do with. If that is generally true there must be hope.

So what are the barriers to sorting out this human despair & pain & giving humanity the chance of a safe life with at least the basic needs satisfied? A lot of people are trying their hardest & risking their lives to do just that already.

Money pours in, but money isn't enough. It needs to be directed to the source of the problems, not to the criminals who pocket it. Politicians say the words at press conferences & meetings to get their ration of soundbites for the electorate. Big charities (NGO's) & international organisations (IGO's) like the UN, OECD, WTO, & SC are bogged down in politics to the extent that they achieve very little.

The mould & the rot need to be treated or we will be engulfed by it. It is a disease which is spreading almost unhindered. Action is needed before it is too late & we unleash another holocaust.

Designer Labels & other irritations

Am I alone in having a problem with the labels inside clothes? Do I have extraordinarily sensitive skin I wonder?

The main problem is the ones at the back of the neck which irritate & itch. I'm not sure whether it's the fabric, which is often quite stiff, or the stitching, which is done several times over, so is raised & sctatches.

Yes I know, I can cut them out, and I do. But you risk accidentally cutting the wrong stitch & then everything could unravel.

I have the same problem with some labels which seem to be made of some sort of plastic - Primark is a prime source. Not only are they itchy, but they have 2 of each for some baffling reason. They also make a crinkly noise.

The labels in some M&S bra's itch in the middle of the back where you can't reach.

All in all, if there are others like me, the problem is easily solved. One lable, made out of a soft fabric, with easily removable large stitching, in a place where there isn't any exposed skin. Job done.

But then, maybe it's just me in the whole world. 

Death Cafe in Summertown

I had never heard of Death Cafe's until very recently. Yesterday I went to one in Summertown. Take a look at the following links.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-25580275
http://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2014/mar/22/death-cafe-talk-about-dying

There were 9 of us and a facilitator called Claire. We covered the whole age spectrum from 20's to 70's.  Some had travelled from as far afield as London. I was just 5 minutes away. Some of the participants knew each other, others didn't. None had been to a Death Cafe before. It lasted for an hour and a half.

In that time we all talked about death - the death of someone we knew & loved, or the fact that we all have to face our own mortality. It was interesting, uplifting, sad, but also often very funny. In that short space of time we shared things about ourselves that we all admitted we had never been able to talk to anyone else about before.

The British don't do death.

It is a subject that is rarely discussed. When it touches you, and it will, you will discover how hard that is. People don't want to talk about death & grief. Children are not brought up to understand that death is a natural part of life. They are all too often excluded from the whole process. No wonder we all have our knickers in a twist about dying.

We all agreed that we aren't afraid of dying itself. What we are afraid of is the process - Dying in pain, dying over a long period of time, dying alone, dying without saying a proper goodbye to friends and family, dying before we are ready.

Death is a reality for everyone. What a relief to be able to talk to other people about it and listen to their stories.

Death Cafe's - what a brilliant idea. I hope they catch on and change our attitudes for the better.

Fitting In v Rocking the Boat

I suspect I never have really fitted in for a whole bunch of reasons:-

• Christened Waldtraut by my German mother in 1945 at the end of the 2nd world war. (No middle name).

• A difficult time at school due to the above + the fact that I was tall for a girl, bright,  & had to wear specs from Infant school onwards.

• Looking back, a childhood and adolescence full of tensions at home due to two very different parents & their personalitites & difficulties. No siblings or extended family at all.

• The influence of my father made me a lifelong Socialist. 

• The influence of my mother made me overly task oriented, conscientious, determined, organised & competitive.

I probably became assertive & bolshie as a defence against a controlling mother & passive father. I was quite emotionally volatile. I felt things deeply & wanted to change things I perceived to be wrong.The latter continues, but with age I hope has come discretion & more understanding and tolerance.

The question is how far should we try to fit in with things which make us uncomfortable? I have recently been brought face to face with that, although I have to admit that on holiday someone, who didn't know me well, once said I wasn't a team player. Now the phrase is fitting in with the ethos of the team. I was also told on a management course that I was an idealist & a reformer, not necessarily comfortable traits. My husband thought my expectations of people were too high & no one but I could meet those expectations!

The thing is that I do believe that boats need to be rocked occasionally, otherwise we all become complacent. Real change comes about because someone somewhere questions the status quo. That can be uncomfortable if you want a quiet life. "Whistle Blowers" have a very difficult time. You only have to look as far as the NHS. People don't want to be challenged, they often take it personally. But, if we go along with something we don't agree with we are condoning it & complicit.

The Bible says "know thyself". Well I think I do, with all my faults. But I also know my own mind and what is important to me. In lots of situations there comes a time to walk away. You have to chose your battles.