The essay that I recently wrote -- On Taking Refuge: A Play In Five Acts -- represents the first pass at an inquiry into the slippery fish of the question: what does it mean to take refuge?

I call this question a "slippery fish" because I've noticed, in recent weeks, how my mind resists settling into a position of looking directly at it, and allowing it to unfold, and instead wriggles and wiggles and squirms -- like a slippery fish -- somehow not wanting to actually see what there is to see (or not-see, as the case may be).


My sense of what is at the root of this "wriggling and wiggling and squirming" is a conflation of (1) some mental-emotional land-mines, and (2) a finely-tuned BS-meter. In other words, in relation to this taking refuge issue, I'm not yet able clearly to discriminate between, on the one hand, some old emotional-body triggers and, on the other hand, the functioning of Manjushri's sword of wisdom -- cutting away what is extraneous, to the kernel of truth within.

So, as I move down the corridor of the inquiry, what arises strongly is an energy of anger/frustration -- of being out-and-out pissed-off. Beneath that is sadness and confusion -- a feeling of being utterly alone, in the midst of a hopeless situation. And as that melts, there's the emergence of a gentle smile (bathed in an ever-present undercurrent of joy), with the clear knowing that that "feeling of being utterly alone, in the midst of a hopeless situation" is the nucleus, if you will, of the emotional land-mine, the configuration of stuck mental-emotional energy -- and that somehow, the "what is refuge" question is entangled within it.

So then, even if the treatment-plan is not yet obvious, I'm relatively confident re: the diagnosis :)

***

Not only as children but also as adults, there are very legitimate mental, emotional and physical needs: for food and water (refuge from hunger/thirst), shelter and clothing (refuge from the elements), affection and appreciation and comaradarie (nourishment for interpersonal growth and celebration). While perhaps the rare mahasiddha can do without some or all of these, for most of us it's imperative that we arrange for some way of having these human-bodymind needs fulfilled, on a daily basis.

En route to the fulfillment of these legitimate human-bodymind needs, we (a la human bodymind) take refuge in various social structures and relationships. Participation in these various contexts creates a flow of resources -- financial, intellectual, emotional etc. -- which we can then apply to the fulfillment of these needs.

So then the ten-million-dollar question becomes: what is the actual, or the ideal, relationship between the kind of "taking refuge" which has to do with fulfillment of the bodymind's needs; and the deeper trans-personal level of "taking refuge" which is knowing: I Am Refuge?

Does knowing -- directly, experientially, and without a doubt -- that True Happiness is taking our stand as the unlimited "space" of Pure Awareness -- in which identification with an individual human bodymind dissolves completely -- in any way transform the shall we say "more relative" needs of that human bodymind (which we now know that, essentially, we are not .... and yet it keeps appearing .... as something like God's little-finger).

To what extent is it preferable to have the more relative needs of the bodymind satisfied in various "secular" contexts -- and to what extent is it preferable for these needs to be satisfied mostly or entirely within the context of "spiritual" organizations? And if the latter, how do we stay clear about the distinction between the Ultimate Refuge (the freedom that is the raison d'être of spiritual practice) and the more relative fulfillment-of-bodymind-needs sort of refuge? Or do the two, at some point, become entirely intermingled?

***

There was a period of time when I participated fairly regularly in what's called Transmission Meditation -- a relatively simple practice form, in which one places the attention on the third-eye area (the pineal/pituitary/hypothalamus area, or what in Taoist practice is known as the Crystal Palace). Then, via a mantra which is chanted collectively a single time, at the beginning of the session, each person in the group inwardly invokes a connection with a number of "ascended masters" whose task it is to assist and orchestrate the meditation -- by coordinating the subtle-body energy of each participant into a larger matrix.

Though I remained for the most part agnostic around the larger conceptual narrative of "what was really happening, and its place in some grand scheme," it was impossible to deny the power of this practice. I found that I could sit almost effortlessly, for two or even three hours at a stretch; would always leave feeling "charged" at the level of my subtle body; experienced a number of seemingly-spontaneous physical healings; along with all variety of "mystical experiences" during the meditations themselves.

So why do I no longer participate in these groups? Because at some point I started to feel that the "refuge" that was being offered came at a price I was no longer willing to pay. There was a hidden tax, which took the form, first of all, of something like a draining of energy from the more physical levels of experience. Secondly -- and most importantly -- it seemed to me that this intimate association with some subtle realm of functioning (what in Buddhism might be called a "God realm"?) was never going to open beyond itself, into True Refuge. It was just another (albeit more "spiritual" or "subtle") story. This isn't to say that the work that was being done was not good, or that the beings involved were not benevolent -- just that it was a form of refuge that, at some point, revealed itself to be, so far as I could see, an endless cul-de-sac.

My experience with this group points to the more general issue of "taking refuge in" the "magic" of subtle realms of functioning, and how this relates, if at all, to the Ultimate Refuge of Pure Awareness, the Mind of Tao, Dharmakaya? It would seem to be the case that becoming adept at manipulating subtle energy (as if appearances were ever anything but "subtle" ... but that's another issue) could contribute positively to our capacity to fulfill our human bodymind needs; and if so, why not? On the other hand, the seductiveness of such occult powers can easily blind us to the fact that such powers are not, in and of themselves, the Ultimate Refuge. On the third hand, if such explorations are your chosen sport -- what floats your boat -- the sort of exploration that you enjoy -- then why not?

I just keep coming back to a commitment to deepest Truth ..... and what is perhaps an overly-sensitive and unforgiving BS-meter :) -- not quite finding my footing on the narrow path between discernment and unconditional acceptance.

*

Of Related Interest

* Homing Pigeons: Exploring Nonviolence In Taoism
* Taoist Meditation In Daily Life: In The Airport At 3AM
* Butterflies, Great Sages & Valid Cognition: Zuangzi For Spiritual Transformation