Party in the Bardo Room

'Hierarchy' is a conceptual superimposition that we project onto the phenomena we experience.

It does not objectively or truly exist.

People believe it does, and have corresponding emotional responses, similar to seeing something in the dark and believing it to be a snake and freaking out, but when you turn on the lights, it is clear that it is only a coil of rope.

I think rhizome is closer in describing the interdependence and impermanence that mark our phenomenal world.

The brain is not disctinct from the body, nor vice versa. EVERYthing is interdependently related, and nothing is separate, independent, or enduring.

Let me reiterate:
Hierarchy is not good or bad, simply because it does not actually exist. We merely believe it does. We believe in it so much (through our cultural conditioning and socialization) that we are emotionally dependent on it.

This is like a child freaking out when their sand castle is unexpectedly swept away by the rising tide.

The point is, we do not have to suffer or freak out at all. We can begin to recognize the patterns of interdependence and impermanence that are undeniably around us and that we are an intrinsic part of.
We can appreciate the basic beauty and ordinary magic that we are constantly participating in.

We can transcend the illusion of hierachy and all of its demeaning lies (that we tell ourselves), and abide in the natural state of things, peacefully.

1:27 PM


Theo_musher said...
you seem to be using the word "hierarchy" as a synonym for "evil"

Then you kind of slip into quasi buddhism and explain why "evil" (in this case hierarchy) is just an illusion.

But what if I don't see hierarchy as representative of all that is evil?

What if I just see it as one set of relationships, like a repeating pattern that matter arranges itself into?

Speaking of Buddhism, That is a hierarchal religion. It has a top down autocratic leadership structure.

Its not democratic or egalitarian at all. That doesn't mean its bad, it just has that pattern. Does a Zen master neccessarily need to prey on his students for it to be a hierarchy?

3:32 PM


sventastic said...
First:
I did not assert nor imply an association between hierarchy and "evil." In fact, I explicity stated:
Hierarchy is not good or bad, simply because it does not actually exist.
Very simply: something that does not exist can't be anything, let alone "evil."
Second:
"Hierarchy" is a conceptual framework based on a belief system of an ontology of power relationships.
Since all relationships are conceptual and relative phenomena (they are subjective interpretations of empirical experience, and as such are variable, diverse, and can change) they do not have an objective status as being truly existent in and of themselves.
Nothing and no experience exists independently, separately, or permanently; requisites for "objectivity."
For instance, one considers the mosquito that bites them and drinks their blood as a pest, whereas the mosquito considers you to be a delicous meal. Who is correct? How can you possibly assert your experience as being superior to another's? It is all merely experience, and one cannot assert a variable interpretation of an experience (which can and does change over time due to the vicisitudes of memory) as being "more real" than any other.
It is the same with socio-political power structures.
Many people fear the government, most likely because they have been taught to. But people and institutions only have the power that we are willing to invest in them, consciously or not. Beliefs in "superior" and "inferior" are subjective interpretations of relative power relationships.
"Hierarchy" is the structure of some being superior over those who are inferior in some way. But beliefs in being subordinate to someone else are variable, diverse, and change over time, and are therefore not truly existent.
Let me reiterate:
Despite the fact that they have shotguns and tear gas and tasers does not make the "government" be superior or have power over me. It can coerce or even destroy me through violence, but that does not make it powerful.
A volcanic eruption or hurricane can coerce and destroy me through "violence," but I do not superimpose the same power dynamics on them that I do to the government.
In fact, it has been historically shown that there is a force more powerful than violence or the threat thereof: love.
One can look to recent examples of Gandhi and Martin Luther King, Jr. and their amazing successes in producing social change my means of non-violent methods, in the face of beligerent and violence-wielding institutions and structures.
Indulgence in violence is of course the par for the course for humanity, and is the path of least resistence for those who are greedy, hate-filled, or afraid of others. But it does not have to be the only way, and in fact, there are forces more powerful than these.
Those who insist on perpetuating "Hierarchy" employ fear and hate-mongering, encourage apathy and complancency, and espouse propaganda and ignorance.
These tactics and strategies are unsustainable and destructive, and has lead us to the brink of global annihilation.
Thirdly:
Buddha said in the Sutra on Pure Realms Spread Out in Dense Array:

"Do not accept my Dharma merely out of respect for me, but analyze and check it the way a goldsmith analyzes gold, by rubbing, cutting and melting it."

That does not sound hierarchical to me. Buddha, and the philosophy he taught, is inherently based on individual examination of one's own experience, use of reason and logic, and innate potential of every single being to become awake to how the world functions. It is not based on coersion, threat or use of violence, or any other features or qualities of Hierarchy.

Like any human institution, Buddhism has unfortunately been co-opted here and there by those who are greedy, scared, or full of hate. But these are absolutely not features of what the Buddha taught, but are rather superimpositions and bad choices made by a few people who call themselves "Buddhists."
That is why the Buddha also said:

Rely not upon the person, but upon the doctrine.

With respect to the doctrine, rely not on the words but on the meaning.

With regard to the meaning, rely not on the interpretable meaning, but on the definitive meaning.

With regard to the definitive meaning, one should rely not upon comprehension by an ordinary state of consciousness but upon an exalted wisdom consciousness.

Because of this, the reliability of teachings cannot be determined by the person who taught them but by investigating the teachings themselves.

11:20 AM


Theo_musher said...
So how is Jeff critiquing somthing that doesn't exist?

Do you consider that to be like critiquing the tooth fairy?

I don't follow you.

I just made the observation that the cells of the human body seem to be arranged in a hierarchy.

Strawberry's seem to be arranged in a rhizome. There appear to be several patterns in nature.

9:37 PM


sventastic said...
More like a perverse combo of the Easter Bunny and Big Brother.

I think what Jeff is critiquing and what I'm trying to expose is the ultimate deceitful con: that it is okay, and actually preferrable, for us to subordinate ourselves to the whims of others.
We are complicit in this indoctrinated system of deception as long as we remain ignorant of it and do nothing to counter it in our own lives.
Daniel Quinn describes this as the constant background hum of socialization to which we've been desensitized called Mother Culture in his great book Ishmael.
The fact that we are not aware of this pervasive ignorance to how things are is testament to the insidiousness of its illusion.
Like I've said, "hierarchy," or belief and emotional investment in it, is not evil, just highly unfortunate and unnecessary.
It is like seeing someone across the street and recognizing them as your friend, and when you run over to greet them, you see with your own eyes that it's actually a stranger. This mistake is not bad or evil, it's just a mistake. We do it all the time. We are being tricked and are tricking ourselves.
The key point here is that we consistently make this mistake with our government. The more propaganda they spew, and the more a complancent populace gobbles it up, the deeper entrenched their heinous scheme becomes.
Hierarchy does not truly exist. We mistaken believe it does, and empower those who exploit us in its name to perpetuate our misery.
Even hierarchy in a non-human context does not exist; relationships are relative and variable. They do not truly exist one way or another, but rather in interdependence with everything. There are infinite points of view of every thing, and therefore no absolute or correct structure or system or hierarchy between them.
The world is what we make of it.
We can chose to continue to imprison ourselves in a twisted web of self-deception and subordination, or we can wake up to the fact that we are inherently good and free, and that the world is actually a magical and blissful place.
In an interesting twist of semantic genius, Chogyam Trungpa Rinpoche in Shambhala: The Sacred Path of the Warrior, describes nature in terms of "natural hierarchy," which is a non-dual, non-conceptual mode of pure being. He does this in stark constrast with our conventional notion of hierarchy, which is a stratified order of superiors dominating inferiors.
Natural hierachy, as Trungpa Rinpoche coined the term, is actually remarkably similar to what Jeff calls rhizome. It is suchness, plain and simple. No good, no evil. No better or worse. No hope and no fear.
This is not contradictory to what I'm espousing above. Trungpa Rinpoche is using language to subvert our common notions of hierarchy, and subversively invented this term to wake us up to the non-dual, non-conceptual nature of reality.
If this is interesting to you, I highly suggest you check out the book.

10:21 AM