Buddhism and the Impermanence of Life || Joseph Goldstein

Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
So the meditation, we could say, is a refinement of
the perception of impermits. From that, the whole world of
dharma opens up. We begin to see that nothing in
and of itself will be ultimately satisfying because nothing less.

Speaker 2 (00:25):
Hello and welcome to the Psychology Podcast. Today's episode is
sponsored by Unlikely Collaborators. Their mission is to entangle the
stories that hold us back as individuals, communities, nations, and
humanity at large using the Perception Box lens. They do
this through storytelling, experiences, impact investments, and scientific research. Unlikely

(00:45):
Collaborators the only way forward is inward. Later on in
this episode, I'll talk a lot more about the perception
box and how it relates to this episode, but right now,
let me tell you about today's guest. Today we welcome
Joseph Goldstein to the show. Joseph is a co founder
and the guide being teacher of the Insight Meditation Society,
along with Jack Cornfield and Sharon Salzberg. He is one

(01:06):
of the first American Vispasuna teachers and has been teaching
Buddhist meditation worldwide since nineteen seventy four. A contemporary author
of numerous popular books on Buddhism, His publications include Mindfulness,
A Practical Guide to Awakening, One Dharma, Insight, Meditation, and others.
In this episode, I talked to Joseph Goldstein about Buddhism
and the impermanence of life. Being too attached to the

(01:29):
self can bring suffering. However, this doesn't mean that we
need to forego our identities or self care. Joseph explains
that enlightenment can be achieved when the mind is free
from clinging. He talks about the different states that can
help us realize the insight of impermanence and selflessness. We
also touch on the topics of mindfulness, compassion, creativity, and wisdom.
This discussion was really rich and involved a lot of

(01:51):
mutual areas of interest and a lot of translation going
back and forth between the kind of phrases and terms
used in my field of psychology and the terms and
phrases that are used in Buddhism. So this was a
really exciting discussion for many reasons. So, without further ado,
I bring you Joseph Goldstein. Joseph Goldstein's so great to
have you on the Psychology Podcast. Finally, go ahead to

(02:13):
be here. We're laughing for our audience because we had
some technical difficulties, but I tried to throughout the whole process.
I tried to apply the things I've learned from you
to not get get caught in the story. You've said
something really interesting one point about I'm trying to paraphrase it,
but we are completely lost in the movie, but nothing

(02:36):
substantial is really happening. That's I think how you described
our consciousness. And often a lot of the time we
got so caught up in it. And you know, ten
minutes from now, you know, is it really going to
matter that much?

Speaker 1 (02:51):
Exactly? That's a good perspective to keep.

Speaker 2 (02:55):
For sure. For sure. So anyway, we're making this work.
So you are co founder of the Insight Meditation Society,
and you founded that many years ago.

Speaker 1 (03:04):
Is that right in the eighties? Was that in the eighties?
Is that eighty nine, seventy six? Oh my gosh, so
it's almost fifty years. Wow.

Speaker 2 (03:13):
Well, well congratulations, that's I mean, that's incredible, it's incredible.
Did to do anything that long? You know, is anything
anything you know that long?

Speaker 1 (03:22):
Is?

Speaker 2 (03:23):
Is really marriage?

Speaker 1 (03:25):
Business?

Speaker 2 (03:27):
Really anything?

Speaker 1 (03:28):
So?

Speaker 2 (03:28):
How old were you? And I asked that is inappropriateness
that how old were you in seventy six.

Speaker 1 (03:34):
I was thirty two.

Speaker 2 (03:36):
Okay, so you were thirty two years old. Kid, you
were a kid, you were I am forty four.

Speaker 1 (03:44):
Forty four, Well, I was no longer a kid.

Speaker 2 (03:47):
I looked like a kid, though I still look still
look like a kid, especially when I shave. So my
question is like, how did you get interested in Buddhism?
You know what, what age did you really start to
get into what? And what I really want to grasp
here with you is what really resonated the most with
your soul back then? You know what was it? What
was it about it about the principles that that most

(04:09):
resonated with your soul?

Speaker 1 (04:10):
First, just to say, within the context of Buddhism, soul
is not really one of the words we use so funny,
But leaving that inside, we can use it for a convention.

Speaker 2 (04:23):
Fair enough, and well, I mean we can go further.
We can say when I say what resonated most with you,
you'd say, well, technically there is no meed I don't know,
I don't even identify with me. So okay, there's there's
so many things wrong with my question there. But you know,
interpreting it however, you will as a layperson, you know,
as a civilian.

Speaker 1 (04:43):
Now I got the meaning of it. No, it's true.
It's true. First was introduced to me in the Peace Corps.
After college, I went into the Piscaus send me to Thailand.
And I had studied philosophy at college, so my mind
was kind of interested. Although I didn't really know anything
about Buddhism at the time. But I started going to

(05:04):
these discussion groups that some Buddhist monks were holding four
Westerners in Bangkok, and so I would go to these
meetings and really interesting to me. But having studied philosophy
and given the quality of my mind, I was asking
endless questions just in these small groups. People stopped coming

(05:25):
to the group because I was going because I was
being so annoying with all my questions. So one of
the monks finally said, Joseph, you know, you might want
to try meditating. And of course I was young at
that time. I was like twenty one years old. You know,
I didn't know anything about meditation, so it was all

(05:45):
very exotic. It was my first time in the Far East,
so oh that sounds great. Get my paraffinalite to get
at the sit, I set my alarm clock for five minutes, said,
want to sit too much. But something really happened in
that five minutes, and it wasn't that it was any
great enlightenment experience. Rather just in that five minutes, I

(06:08):
saw that there was a way to look into my
mind instead of simply looking out through it. And so
it was like a turning in place and seeing that
there was a methodology for looking into the mind. So
that was incredibly exciting for me. It was just like
a revelation, you know, that I could systematically watch my

(06:31):
own mind. I got so excited that I started inviting
my friends over to watch me medicine. Of course they
didn't come back. Yeah, so that was that was really
what captured my interest. And then gradually he started to
sit for longer than five minutes, and by the end

(06:53):
of my time in the Peace Corps, I realized that
I wanted to pursue it, but that I really needed
a teacher. So I had gone back to the States
after my peace cost State realized I wanted to teacher,
and then went back to the East to look for
meditation teacher, and I ended up in India in Bogaya,
where that's the place where the Buddha was enlightened and

(07:15):
I met my first teacher there.

Speaker 2 (07:17):
Now, when did you come across Jack?

Speaker 1 (07:20):
That wasn't many years later when I came back for
the last time from India. That was in nineteen seventy four,
and it was just that was the year that Trumpempache
was setting the Europa Institute up, you know, kind of
Buddhist Buddhist College university in Boulder. In those years, it

(07:43):
was just summer sessions. But Jack and I both ended
up at the Rope in that summer and that's where
we really became friends and finally collaborators.

Speaker 2 (07:56):
And then where did when did Sharon pop up on
the scene in this movie?

Speaker 1 (08:00):
Well, Sharon I knew from my time in India.

Speaker 2 (08:03):
Oh wow, you did you meet her in India?

Speaker 1 (08:06):
Yeah? Wow, So I met her in nineteen I think
it was nineteen seventy, In nineteen seventy when she came
to bud Guy to sit one of the first Goanka courses. Yes,
so that's when we met.

Speaker 2 (08:20):
You guys were kids.

Speaker 1 (08:22):
Absolutely. Do you have any.

Speaker 2 (08:23):
Pictures from that time? Do you have any pictures from
that time?

Speaker 1 (08:28):
Probably someplace you have some early pictures there. Yeah.

Speaker 2 (08:33):
Well, Sharon's a dear friend of mine, and.

Speaker 1 (08:36):
Yeah, she said, and she said to say hello, by
the way, thank you. Cool.

Speaker 2 (08:39):
Cool, And it's just it's so cool to hear this
origin story. Yeah, you know, of all three of you
in a way, you know, real pioneers in I know
modesty is all important everything in Buddhism, but you all
are pioneers on bringing a lot of these ideas to
the West. So there's so much to discuss today. It's
so much I really want to like, so much nuance

(09:02):
in this.

Speaker 1 (09:03):
You know.

Speaker 2 (09:04):
One thing is this idea of enlightenment. And depending on
your school of thought, your philosophy of Buddhism, there's there
are very different metaphysical systems of what enlightenment means. But
I read that you you argued, well roughly there, you know,
there's a thread that seems to run through all of them,

(09:24):
and that's enlightenment is when the mind is free of clinging.
Do you still stand by that statement? And then can
you unpack from a little more what it means to
be free of clinging to your thoughts?

Speaker 1 (09:35):
So before getting into that, I have a new favorite
definition of enlightenment.

Speaker 2 (09:42):
Excellent'm glad I asked this.

Speaker 1 (09:43):
Then, yes, it'll be worth elaborating where you just say,
my new favorite definition is lightening up. That is really
a process of just lightening up. I really like that,
and unpacking that a little bit more, which which dovetails

(10:05):
into the more classical Buddhist definitions of it. It really
becomes means becoming less and less self centered, you know,
less self referential. And for most of us in our lives,
we are the center of our lives. There's this sense

(10:26):
of self, so that that in a way, self centered
can have a kind of more superficial psychological meaning. You know,
we say somebody is really self centered, so we know
what that means conventionally, but we drill down a little
deeper self centered that is centered around a self, and

(10:50):
the whole Buddhist path is really seeing the selfless nature
of this whole mind body process. So in that sense,
lightening up means weakening the sense of self center and
finally uprooting, which is in classical terms, the first stage

(11:14):
of enlightenment with a view where we're seen beyond the
view of self, and that that belief that view is
actually uprooted at that point, and so in classical terms,
that's what it's called stream entry, entering the stream to enlightenment.

Speaker 2 (11:32):
I love all these visuals as well. They're all very
like ocean. I love it.

Speaker 1 (11:39):
No, I love it.

Speaker 2 (11:41):
Can you be self focused at times without being selfish?
I think a lot about this, you know?

Speaker 1 (11:48):
What?

Speaker 2 (11:48):
Is it always bad? Being self referential?

Speaker 1 (11:52):
Is that not?

Speaker 2 (11:53):
Again?

Speaker 1 (11:53):
Bad?

Speaker 2 (11:54):
Is a judgment, a judgment called it's not very Buddhist
to me either? But but leading to can you still
be leading to enlightenment and and be self focused?

Speaker 1 (12:02):
Yes? So there are a couple of things here. Even
though the kind of essence, really the core of the
Buddhist teachings is understanding and realizing selflessness, still we use

(12:22):
that word in a conventional way just for purposes of communication,
you know. So that's fine. I'm not suggesting we give
up the idea, you know, just using common language. So
in this sense, and I'll give you an example of it,
when one is doing the love and kindness practice, you know,

(12:46):
in Polg's called meta, we direct loving wishes to a
sequence of categories of beings, starting with oneself, then a
factor frame, neutral person, difficult person, and then all beings.
And the idea is to equalize the quality of our

(13:10):
love and kindness and love and care among all of
those categories, including what we conventionally call self right, so
very that's part of the well wishing and the caring
for all beings. So all beings include ourselves. So there's

(13:33):
no so taking care in a skillful way, and it
doesn't have to be in what conventionally we would call
a selfish mode. It really can come out of a wisdom.
It's like we take care of our health, you know.
That's not being selfish, it's being wise. So there's no

(13:58):
problem with that. But it's to understand that we're using
the term self there conventionally. It would be very awkward
to say, oh, I'm going to take care of this
mind body process constituted with the five aggregates. My self
is just assured it. Yeah, yeah, So we use it

(14:21):
conventionally and it's helpful.

Speaker 2 (14:25):
I really appreciate that clarification, you know. I I've been
obsessed with a certain paradox I noticed in my psychology research,
and that's that it seems like the most psychologically healthy
people have the strongest sense of self, you know, And
so just let that sit there a moment, what I
just said, because it's very very interesting I'm trying to

(14:46):
integrate this with with Buddhist philosophy because we find over
and over again, those who are you can even say
the inverse, those who have the high levels of anxiety, stress, depression,
and even what we call vulnerable narcissism, tend to report
there are actually scales on the extent to which you
have a sense of self, report feeling like they're constantly

(15:08):
shape shifting depending on right. They don't feel like they
know who they are at all, feel any sense of self.
So is this compatible? Can we can we integrate these
literatures in a way because on first past they seem incompatible,
But I bet they're not. I bet they're not at all.

Speaker 1 (15:25):
They're not because again, different systems of understanding often use
the same word meaning different things. So when you're comparing
the different systems, thinking that they're referring to the same

(15:47):
thing because the word they're using, like self or ego
is the same in psychological in this psychological paradigm and
the Buddhist paradigm, they are using those terms very differently.
So my understanding and I'm not a therapist, I'm not

(16:08):
a trained psychologist, but you know from what I've learned
over all these.

Speaker 2 (16:12):
Years, we neither by the way, Okay, so I didn't
say anything.

Speaker 1 (16:17):
Man, When psychologists use the term self or ego, my
understanding is translating that into Buddhist terms would be a
healthy balance of mind. Good. I like that when the

(16:39):
when the term self or ego is used, just in
the Buddhist sense, that's referring to the idea that there
is some unchanging entity residing within us. And that was
what I was referring to at the very beginning of
our conversation with respect to the word soul, you know,

(17:02):
as if there's some unchanging core being hiding out, you know.
So that's what the buddhas said, is not that's a
mistaken view of what this mind body trucess is all about.
So just using the terms differently, and I think the

(17:24):
Buddhists would agree that. And part of the path is
to have a healthy sense of self in a psychological
sense is essential, you know. We and a lot of
the practice is accomplishing that balance of the mind, you know.
So again they complement one another really well.

Speaker 2 (17:48):
Yeah, I am so excited to announce that registrations are
now open for our self actualization coaching intensive. While the
coaching industry has taken great strides over the years toward
integrating more evidence based coaching approaches, there are still a
lot of work to be done. Many coach training programs
still lack strong foundations and science and do little to

(18:10):
incorporate research informed tools, methodologies, or approaches for helping clients thrive.
For twenty years, I've dedicated my career to rigorously testing
ways to unlock creativity, intelligence, and our potential as human beings. Now,
for the first time ever, I've compiled some of my
greatest insights to bring the new science of self actualization
to the field of professional coaching. This immersive three day

(18:32):
learning experience will introduce you to self actualization coaching, an
approach intended to enhance your coaching practice by offering you
evidence based tools and insights from my research that will
equip you to more effectively help your clients unlock their
unique potential. Don't miss out on this unique opportunity. Join
us and take your coaching practice to the next level.
Go to sacoaching dot org. That's sacoaching dot org. I

(18:58):
look forward to welcoming you into I find the Buddhist
perspective so beautiful and it has impacted me personally so much.
As I was writing my book transcend I came across
some writings from the humanistic psychologist Abraham Maslow where he
put it this way, and I want to see how
this resonates with you, because it really resonated with my
not not s word, but my being. Or what he

(19:22):
said is that the purpose of self actualization is to
erase itself.

Speaker 1 (19:28):
He said that was so beautiful, Absolutely love it.

Speaker 2 (19:32):
And then he said, I mean he had such a
way with words, you know, Maslow. And then he also said,
if done right, self actualization really just allows you to
walk the bridge to transcendence. And that's that's how I
view it, you know, when I yeah, yeah, when I
talk about self actualization, and I really my whole research
program is about self actualization. I don't mean it as

(19:54):
as an individualistic pursuit context of the world, but I
actually do you think that self actualization, though, is a
really important step on the paths of transcendence. And I
don't think the Buddhist would ever say that, you know,
we shouldn't have self actualization. We should only you know,
I don't know, we should have no sense of self.

(20:15):
I mean, that's just such a mischaracterization of Boo the
way the Buddha thought about this, right, Yes.

Speaker 1 (20:22):
Yes, Again, it just points so that they're using the
word self in two different ways. So in the way
that Maslow is using it, as I said, it fits
in perfectly. And I love the quotes you said. Because
in self actualization, the self disappears and comes the way
to transcendence. That that could be enough in a Buddhist perspective,

(20:47):
that could be saying, yeah, when all the factors of
enlightenment are in balance, it leads to transcendence.

Speaker 2 (20:56):
Yes, But if you do it too quickly, like if
you just lose some one day you wake up and
you've lost all sense of self, that's a very jarring
situation for a human. That's that that'll put you in
a mental institution, Like that'll that I mean, that's that's
can be scary, you know, if you devoid from the
self actualization journey.

Speaker 1 (21:16):
You know. Yeah, but in the way you express that, yes,
using the term self in the psychological yeah sense, Yeah,
it doesn't make sense to say somebody who realizes that

(21:40):
that the non self too early, they go off of business. Yes,
because using that term in the psychological sense it's like
saying losing the sense of balance of mind is a
good thing, because in the way you frame the question,

(22:02):
it is like, if you lose the sense of self
too early, that's like saying losing the sense of balance
too early.

Speaker 2 (22:11):
It can't be good psychologically.

Speaker 1 (22:14):
Exactly, and so it's a false It's like a red herot,
you know, to say losing the sense of self too early.
Self in the psychological meaning, yeah, really means just a
healthy balance of mind. And of course one doesn't want
to lose lose that healthy balance.

Speaker 2 (22:33):
Yeah, one doesn't want to lose that. Yet that's great,
that's a great sort of reframing of it.

Speaker 1 (22:39):
Yeah, I think it's clearer because, as I say, clear
the word itself because it has different meanings in psychology
and Buddhism. Unless you're very precise in how you're using
the term, it gets confusing.

Speaker 2 (22:53):
Definitely, definitely. I mean there's like four hundred different definitions
of the word self in psychology, we want to ask
in Buddhism. But it is interesting, like what do we
even mean by the self? You know, Mark Leary, the
social psychologist tends to view the self as just the
apparatus that allows for self representations. It can get so complicated,

(23:17):
I mean.

Speaker 1 (23:17):
Exactly, really complication, I mean, and that's my way. That's
why the meditation is so such a powerful force, because
we begin to let go of a lot of the
descriptions and which can get really elaborate, and we just
come into the simplicity of the moment to moment experience

(23:40):
and it becomes much easier to understand.

Speaker 2 (23:45):
It's funny, my friend Sam Harris, and I believe you
knew Sam maybe when he was younger. Yeah, he was
probably very young, you know, and when you first met him,
but when we became friends, he was quite a bit older.
But his response to like a lot of arguments, you know,
especially about free will, you know, his answer is just

(24:08):
just meditate more, Scott. And you'll see that I'm right,
just like, like, okay, all arguments and logic and reason
and science, just Scott, you need to meditate more. I
believe that's how you responded me on Twitter ones And
then we obviously have in personal conversations about this all

(24:29):
the time. But anyway, this is funny. So there's a
lot of insight that can be gained from this first
person experience of meditation and mindfulness. Can you just give
me a little bit of a list of some of
the potential forms of insight that are available to us
through a regular mindfulness practice.

Speaker 1 (24:47):
Yes. So there's one insight which is really the doorway
to all the others, right so, and it's a very
easy insight to relate to, and that is through the
meditation we get a very direct, immediate experience of the

(25:11):
changing nature everything. And in the Buddhist classic phrases, whatever
has the nature to arise will also pass away. And
this happens on every timescale. So you can look out
on a macro level, you know, clusters of galaxies, you know,

(25:32):
on their own timescale, they come into being and eventually
they die down to the sub atomic particle level, it's
in constant movement, constant change, and everything in between. So
what's interesting to me is that we could go up
to anybody on the street and ask them to things change,

(25:57):
and I think everybody would say yes. And yet we
don't live that understanding, right so we it's not difficult
to grasp conceptually, but meditation gives us a certain immediacy
of experience of that and on increasingly refined levels. So

(26:22):
there's something I call in meditation, I call np ms,
which are noticings per minute. So when we first begin
our practice, the npms are not very high, I mean
maybe ten noticings a minute, but as the practice goes on,

(26:45):
those npms go way way up. Sorry, just a very
simple example. People will often begin meditation maybe filling their breath.
You know, at the beginning they experience are you it's
the in breath and the out breath. But as the
mind gets clearer, more concentrated, and steadier, begin to see

(27:07):
that the ing breath is a flow of innumerable more
microscopic sensations. It's not one thing within one ingreath. There
is so much going on in terms of what can
be felt. So the meditation, we could say, is a
refinement of the perception of self, of refinement of the

(27:32):
perception of impermanence. From that, the whole world of dorma
opens up. Because when we've really seen that not only
with the breath, but with every aspect of our experience,
you know, just the momentariness of the flow of sights

(27:53):
and sounds and smells and sensations of the body and
thoughts to the emotions, the whole world we begin to
see that nothing in and of itself will be ultimately
satisfying because nothing less. So it may be satisfying in
the moment, that it might be pleasant in the moment

(28:16):
and happiness inducing in the moment. But because of this
universal truth of everything continually changing in motion and flow,
there's nothing which is going to provide lesting satisfaction because
nothing is lesting, And that just becomes increasingly obvious. And

(28:39):
a corollaria of that is that if we're attached to
that which is changing, to that which in its very
nature is to change, we'll suffer because like somebody used
the example of it being like rope burned. You know,
somebody's pulling a rope through our hands and we're holding
on to it titlely. Yeah, we get roper. Well, that's

(29:04):
what we're doing in our lives. Very often, we're holding
on tightly to different aspects, and of course when they change,
we suffer, you know. And this is where it comes
back to what you said in the beginning kind of
one of the essence teachings is that clinging is the

(29:25):
course of suffering. Yeah, and that freedom is in letting
go of the grisk So you can see perhaps how
all of the dorma can unfold from the experience, from
the refined experience of their permanence.

Speaker 2 (29:40):
Yeah, that's beautiful. And the more I practice that, I
clearly I'm okay with the everyday new ones, every day annoyances,
but there's something I want to really dive really deep into.
And in the psychology field, there's great debate and discussion
around the difference between mindfulness and flow. It seems like

(30:03):
when you're in the flow state of consciousness at least
is defined by ME High chicks at ME High, you're
not constantly checking in and watching your thoughts. You're you're
you're just in it. And so you know, a liberation
doesn't always require every moment you're the meda cognition, right,

(30:24):
the metacognition, the thinking about thinking does it. Because when
you're in the flow state.

Speaker 1 (30:29):
Well, we'll unpack this a little bit.

Speaker 2 (30:31):
Unpack it.

Speaker 1 (30:32):
I think that's confusing two different mental qualities, mindfulness and concentration.
So these two have different functions in the mind.

Speaker 2 (30:44):
Okay, So in.

Speaker 1 (30:47):
The flow state. Another another word for concentration is undistractedness.
So when you're in a flow state, the mind is
not distracted, right, right, You're just in the flow. So
that's that really describes a state of concentration rather than

(31:08):
the quality of mindfulness, because we could be in a
flow state, a concentrated state without learning anything from it.
It feels good, I mean, and it's it's a powerful state.
I don't want to undervalue that aspect because it is

(31:29):
actually part of the whole path. But it's not mindfulness, right,
and it's not it's not necessarily connected with wisdom. It
does have the attributes of effortless, effortless flow, you know,
with the mind it's not distracted, it's just completely in
the flow of whatever the activity is, and there's something

(31:51):
very fulfilling about that. But that's that's different than developing
insight with developing wisdom. So it's just two different things.

Speaker 2 (32:02):
Yeah, and I think that's pretty much the consensus, and
a lot of people do agree on that in the field,
that there are different constructs.

Speaker 1 (32:09):
Yeah.

Speaker 2 (32:11):
Today's podcast is sponsored by Unlikely Collaborators. Their mission is
to untangle the stories that hold us back as individuals, communities, nations,
and humanity at large using the perception box lens. They
do this through storytelling, experiences, impact investments, and scientific research.
Today's Conversation with Joseph really illustrates the importance of expanding

(32:33):
the walls of our perception box. The perception box is
the invisible mental box that we all live inside, and
it can seriously hinder our ability to understand one another
and to understand ourselves. In this episode, Joseph points out
that a major insight of Buddhism is that whatever arises
can pass away. Joseph Astutey notes that we can refine

(32:54):
our perception of impermanence so that we aren't so attached
or clinging to the thing which is changing. From a
perception box perspective, when we are caught in our story tangles,
we can have difficulty seeing anything but the things we
should do or become. Using the tools of meditation, self reflection, breathwork,
somatic experiences, and other modalities helps you get a distance

(33:17):
from the stories you tell yourselves so that you can
have more equanimity about how to move forward. What's beautiful
about impermanence is that no matter how permanent something feels,
there is an equanimity in perceiving that it too shall pass.
Even though you will never get out of your perception box,
you do have agency where its walls are and what
stories you believe about whatever you are experiencing and the

(33:39):
impermanence about it. To find out more about unlikely collaborators
and the perception box, go to Unlikely Collaborators dot com.
You know, if the flow state is so conducive to
creativity and to you know, when when jazz improvisers are
doing their thing, they're you know, they're all they're kind
of in the post and when you're jamming, when you're
really jamming, only that can be a path to wisdom, right,

(34:05):
I mean, do you always have to have metacognition to
lead to wisdom?

Speaker 1 (34:08):
Well, again, so this this will depend on your definition
of wisdom. You know, people could use that word in
a lot of different ways.

Speaker 2 (34:18):
How do you define wisdom?

Speaker 1 (34:20):
Well, if we were going to define it in the
context of Buddhism, you know, so it's a very specific parameters.
Wisdom really has to do with insight into what I'll
called the three characteristics of impermanence, unsatisfactories, and selflessness. So

(34:43):
those are the insights which lead to non grasping. Now,
it's interesting about concentration. Concentration state is and this is
true of just medicative concentration as well as kind of
a flow state. At that time the Buddhist language, the

(35:04):
hindrances are suppressed. So in the flow state that could
well be non clinging because we're just in the flow
of the changing phenomena. Yeah, but without the meta cognition.
So the non clinging is suppressed during that time, but

(35:25):
then when we're out of it, it just comes up again,
right and is reactivated because we haven't really brought our
investigation to the experience of the flow. So in that
time the minds the mind is in a very good place,

(35:46):
but it's not necessarily developing the wisdom that will purify
the mind. Wow. And that's why in Buddhism, like constant,
the developm of concentration is an important part of the path.
So it's really an essential aspect. It's necessary but not sufficient. Yeah,

(36:10):
So it's that state is very much appreciated from many
qualities that brings, but there are certain qualities it doesn't bring, right,
and that's really the the investigation quality of mind.

Speaker 2 (36:24):
Yeah, I hear you, and I can see clearly how
that fits onto some of the primary creativity frameworks in
the field of psychology, where you distinguish between the insight phase,
the incubation phase, the evaluation phase, I mean creativity. The
whole creative process involves different states of consciousness at different times.

Speaker 1 (36:44):
And yeah, absolutely, valuation.

Speaker 2 (36:46):
Stage is an important part of the creative process, which
is often separate from the flow state, often separate from
the idea generation stage.

Speaker 1 (36:54):
Right.

Speaker 2 (36:55):
And I've been really interested in different forms of meditation
influencing those different stages of creativity. Researchers I found that
open monitoring meditation is correlated with divergent thinking, whereas more
return of the breath meditation is correlated with convergent thinking
in the creativity framework.

Speaker 1 (37:14):
I know what those terms oka creativity.

Speaker 2 (37:18):
Yeah, so in the in the creativity field, divergent thinking
is thinking as many possible ideas as possible. You're not
evalue ating any of them, You're just letting your just
generating association, generating new ideas. Conversion thinking is you're trying
to figure out, well, what is what are the best ones?
You know? What? What what is what is the one
best answer?

Speaker 1 (37:38):
You know?

Speaker 2 (37:38):
When you take a SAT, the SAT is not about
generating possibilities, is about giving what was the answer?

Speaker 1 (37:45):
Right?

Speaker 2 (37:46):
So, so I have found that interesting that different forms
of meditation, jog or stimulate different stages of the creative process.

Speaker 1 (37:55):
Yeah, you know, just interesting. So in terms of my
on playing with creativity in recent years, maybe in the
last five years or so, I started writing poetry, which
I did in my twenties but have not really since then.
So it's kind of a new thing, and it's kind

(38:17):
of the evolution of it has been really interesting because
in the first excitement of doing it, I had this
rather sophomore idea that the first things out of my
mind on paper were brilliant. Yeah, and that in a
way that was that was kind of the divergent Yeah,

(38:40):
whatever comes up, you know.

Speaker 2 (38:42):
Yeah.

Speaker 1 (38:42):
But then I was getting some advice from a very
well established poet friend, and her the best piece of
advice she gave me in the creative process was that
it's all about revision, you know, And I just found
that to be so true because Okay, you know, the

(39:04):
initial creative you know, you're playing just with different ideas
and you get something down, but then that's just the
beginning and the crafting of it is cutting away everything
that's extra and you know, finding just the right word.
So it feels like it's connected a little bit to
what you just said.

Speaker 2 (39:24):
Oh very much, so very much. So yeah, I mean
show me the person who's happy with their first draft
of a book. Yeah, no, that's that's right. So but yeah,
just just recognizing their different states of consciousness. I guess
it doesn't seem very Buddhist. I'm gonna be critical for
one moment. I want to see how you respond to this.

(39:45):
It just doesn't seem very Buddhist part of the philosophy
to label certain states of consciousness as the liberating states
and others is not liberating or not leading to enlightenment.
Kind of making that pre judgment call. I feel like
the Buddha made that judgment call. So tell me if
I'm wrong.

Speaker 1 (40:05):
But no, I definitely did he did, right, it's so
much Okay, this question can lead to kind of an elaborate,
an elaborate discussion on the first level.

Speaker 2 (40:22):
I like that. I like elaborate discussions.

Speaker 1 (40:24):
Yeah, on the first level of the Buddha was really clear.
He kind of divided mind states into those which are wholesome, unwholesome,
and neither. And basically, the wholesome means conducive to different
kinds of happiness. Unwholesome the causes of suffering. So in

(40:48):
a very simple way in the Buddhen he laid out
really clearly the three wholesome men on the wholesome roots
of all the other mind states. So for example, greed
and hatred and delusion, they are unwholesome mind states. They
do not lead to liberation, They lead to suffering, and

(41:13):
there are many Those are the roots, and then there
are many other unwholesome states based in those three. The
three roots of wholesome mind states on non greed or generosity,
non hate or loving kindness, and non delusion, which is wisdom,
those are the stakes that do lead to happiness into awakening.

(41:35):
So on this level, and as we're walking the path,
that discernment is really important. You know, are we cultivating
more greed in what we do or more anger, more hatred?
Are we cultivating more generosity, more love, more understanding? And

(41:56):
to be able to see you know, true meditation to
real we get a very clear visual experience of the
effect of these different mind states. So this is basically
essential to all the schools of Buddhism. However, or in addition,

(42:17):
at a certain level of meditative practice, we also see
that all mind states, you know, in Buddhism that we
use the word empty emptiness, and it really and that
can have a lot of different meanings. But some of
the meanings are insubstantial or no inherent self existence to them,

(42:44):
and so on another level, for example, the different contents
of our thoughts. On this level, it doesn't really matter
whether it's a greedy thought or loving thought if we're
in that place of seeing the momentary, the momentary insubstantial

(43:06):
nature of all thought. So then it's then it's just
authorizing in the mind. The content really doesn't matter because
we're not identified with it and it's just coming and going.
And because we're not identified with it or clinging to it,
the content is less important.

Speaker 2 (43:26):
Mm hmm.

Speaker 1 (43:27):
It's just so there's a There was a Korean sent
teacher som sn sansanin it started the Providence and Center
and a lot, you know, it was very popular and
have lots of French monasteries. He had He had an
interesting phrase expressing these two levels what I just mentioned.

(43:49):
He said, there's no right and no wrong right, but
right is right and wrong is wrong, so we have
to hold both.

Speaker 2 (43:57):
That's what I'm trying to get at, is it somewhat contradictory.

Speaker 1 (44:02):
It's at all, It's not two different levels. But unfortunately,
and many great masters have pointed this out, that the
attachment to the notion of emptiness is much more dangerous
than the attachment to things, because the attachment to things,

(44:29):
you can work on it. If you're attached to the
notion of emptiness at leads to that sense of, oh,
it doesn't matter what I do because everything's empty, which
is a very dangerous state because for two reasons. One,
that's really attachment to the idea of emptiness, not to
the realization of it. If one had fully realized the emptiness,

(44:56):
then there would be a great freedom in that. But
until we are fully enlightened, we are living on that
more relative plane. We are right is right and wrong
is wrong, and not to acknowledge that level leads to huge,
huge amount of suffering, you know, And we say with

(45:18):
a lot of Gooddhist teachers who get into big trouble,
or teachers of every tradition really, you know, who may
have had some realization or some understanding and then think
that whatever they do is the perfect expression of enlightenment.

Speaker 2 (45:34):
I call that spiritual narcissism.

Speaker 1 (45:36):
Yeah, yeah, so it's very dangerous to just take one
of those two levels and not integrate both of them.

Speaker 2 (45:48):
Wow, you're a very wise man, Joseph Goldstein.

Speaker 1 (45:51):
No, I wouldn't miss that list.

Speaker 2 (45:53):
Yeah, I hope you heard that.

Speaker 1 (45:55):
I hope you heard that.

Speaker 2 (46:00):
You know, the context in which I was thinking about
this was that the kind of difference between the mindful
the neuroscience of mindfulness research literature, and the neuroscience of
creativity research literature. I've been trying to really integrate those
literatures because in the mindfulness literature, you know, researchers like

(46:22):
Judson Brewer. Maybe you've encountered him, Yeah, great, great, great guy,
he was on my podcast. But his research is so
focused on the neuroscience of the mindfulness mental state, and
so therefore, within that context he shows a reduction in
what's called the default mode brain network. But in the

(46:44):
creativity literature, the activation of the default mode network is
considered great. It's almost like in the different literatures, you know,
the different states of consciousness are kind of championed in
different ways. Is like Judson Brewer, I feel like he
gets really excited when he shows a reduction in the
default bone network. He's like there. It means we're not

(47:07):
so caught up in our in our self narratives. It
means we're not so but in the creativity literature, to
be caught up in the flow state and to be
fully in line with your default mode network is a beautiful,
beautiful thing for for creative expression of your being. So anyway,
I think there's a way to obviously integrate and to

(47:30):
uh to to to be very contextual and nuanced about
all of this. But what pains me is when I
see it as either one or the other. That that's
what pains me.

Speaker 1 (47:41):
Yeah.

Speaker 2 (47:42):
Yeah.

Speaker 1 (47:42):
There are two Greek myths which I think illustrates something
which you can you can see what they illustrate, but
I use that sometimes as examples. So you know, the
myth of is, you know, pushing them rock up the
hill endlessly and falls down. And Stephen Mitchell, he's a poet,

(48:09):
a writer, translator, He's done a lot of he's done
a lot of very interesting work. So he wrote a
poem about myths and he's said, basically, Sissphis is in
love with his rock, you know, and really all he
has to do is step aside, let it roll to
the bottom, and go home. Okay, so just hold that

(48:30):
for a moment. The other myth is of Icarus, you know,
who got you don't want her to fly and created
these wings of wax, and his father says, be careful,
don't fly too close to the sun.

Speaker 2 (48:46):
M m.

Speaker 1 (48:47):
But he got so excited he flew close to the
sun the max the wax melted, fell to the earth. Okay.
So these two myths represent different ways we can apply
or or misapply spiritual practice. So we're all we're all

(49:09):
in a cisophine situation of dealing with suffering in our lives.
Right of all, come, it's the first noble truth of teaching.

Speaker 2 (49:20):
You know, that's good.

Speaker 1 (49:23):
The question is, and it's possible. And we see this often.
It's people come to meditate in a way, we can
fall in love with our suffering. We just get so
messed in our personal story, just entangled in our suffering.

Speaker 2 (49:41):
I see that everywhere these days.

Speaker 1 (49:43):
Yes, so some teaching which would point to the empty
nature of it all, you know, the selfless nature of
it all, could help free the mind from that entanglement
with the suffering. You know, we begin to see the
freedom in the midst of it. But sometimes people become

(50:07):
like Icarus, and they hear it teaching about the ultimate
emptiness of everything. We might call it sometimes it's phrase
Cispis is building the practice from below, and Icarus is
swooping from above, you know. So there are a lot
of teachings which swoop from above, you know, which go

(50:29):
right to the empty nature of everything. But if they
do that without having been grounded in working with the
suffering that's there, that's like Icarus flying too close to
the sun because they have not genuinely realized that emptiness.

(50:52):
It's either partial or conceptual, but they're using it. And
so in both ways, we can get caught to attached
to us suffering or to attach to emptiness. And so
our path has to see the value of both and

(51:15):
apply each of those at the appropriate times. So I
don't see it as one or the other. It's like,
these are complementary perspectives that can help to free us
in different ways, and we have to be very skillful
in how we're employing the various understandings.

Speaker 2 (51:39):
See, I really like that approach here everyone. I'd like
to take a moment to talk about one of my
favorite products that helps support my body and mind as
I age. On the Psychology Podcast, we frequently talk about
forms of wisdom and self actualization that are often achieved
in our thirties and forties or even older. But it
can be frustrating to finally know what you want out
of life just as you start to lose the mental

(52:01):
and physical energy to go get it. A culprit of
decreasing energy, slower workout, recovery, and general middle aged symptoms
that start showing up in our thirties is sentient cell accumulation.
Sentient cells are sometimes called zombie cells because they are old,
worn out cells, no longer doing their job in our bodies,
but they linger on in us after we want them gone,

(52:21):
wasting our energy and nutrition. Qualiosnalytic is an amazing formula
made by Neurohacker Collective, a company I really trust. I've
known the folks at Neurohacker Collective for years now, and
they really are thoughtful about what they put into their products,
always trying to be as science informed as possible. Qualia
Synalytic combines nine vegan, non GMO plant arrived ingredients that

(52:42):
help your body eliminate sentient cells. Personally, it helps me
operate with the wisdom of a forty something with the
mental and physical energy of a twenty something. The best
part is you take qualitias Analytic just two days a month.
It's so easy and so helpful to the human aging process.
To try qualias Analytic up to fifty percent backed by
a one hundred day money back guarantee, go to neurohacker

(53:03):
dot com and use code Psych podcast fifteen for an
additional fifteen percent off. That's quality of Synalytic for better
aging and prime energy Deep into Life at neurohacker dot
com slash Psych podcast slash Psych fifteen. I would argue
sometimes it is very valuable and leading to less suffering

(53:26):
to not you know, when a lion's come and running
at you, to be able to thinking about your thoughts, well,
let me enter a mindfulness practice, you know, as this
lion's that's not going to lead to greater to less suffering.
And then but I would also argue that the other hand,
there are times where getting lost in your self narrative
can be beneficial. And can we either, I mean you can.

(53:49):
I'm sure we can come up with examples where we
want to, for instance, compassion. All the research I've seen
shows that the default mode network is so important for
perspective taking, because we have difficulty having compassion for another
human if we don't relate ourselves in some way to

(54:09):
the suffering we're seeing of someone else. Mary Hell and
Immerdino Yang has showed that so beautifully in her neuroscience research.
So we want to make a connection between ourself and
the world in moments and so anyway, I love that contextual.
I love what you just said, and I guess it
does irk me. And I just wanted to say that

(54:30):
on the record. Sometimes when I see different silos getting
a little too caught in their own the thing they study,
do you know what I mean? That's all I'm saying.

Speaker 1 (54:44):
I know you you came across. I mean, this was
a burning issue for me within the context of different
Buddhist traditions, which I wrote about in my book One Doma,
because I was studying with different teatures of different traditions,
both great masters, seemingly great in landin beings saying opposite things.

Speaker 2 (55:05):
Right, right, what do you do with that?

Speaker 1 (55:07):
Well? That was my co on for a couple of months,
and it was burning, I mean, because it felt like
the whole direction of my life depended on figuring out
who was right. And as I was burning with that question,
I was on a two months retreat, it got resolved
in a really interesting way, and I framed it kind

(55:29):
of in a phrase metaphysics as skillful means rather than
as statements of truth, because if we take metaphysical statements
as being statements of truth, then if people are saying
opposite things, one will be right and one will be wrong.
If we take them as skillful means, and then we

(55:51):
could there skillful means for what. Well, in the Buddhist context,
it could be skillful means for not clinging. Then it
doesn't matter whether they're staying opposite things. If that metaphysical
statement helps free people from clinging, great, If the other
one helps people free themselves from thing great, And different

(56:15):
systems will attract or appeal to different people. But it's again,
if the important point is seeing them as skillful means,
then we can really embrace lots of different methods, lots
of different metaphysics if we understand why they're leading or

(56:35):
what the practice of them accomplishes.

Speaker 2 (56:38):
Yeah, that's really good. It seems like so much of
Buddhist principles are actually in line with the flow state
of being, of being itself. You know, the idea that
when you live your life with inner beauty, and I
love that whole concept of inter beauty, and I think
we need to value that a lot more in our

(56:58):
society today. And you live with the life of where
you're you're you're happy to look at yourself in the mirror.
You know, you're proud of yourself, you know, not you know,
as pride as a non virtue, but healthy pride for
for being moral, you know, for for making the right decisions.
There's less of a friction, you know, there's a that's

(57:19):
That's what I'm saying by flow of being, there's you know,
you're not so unhindered by this, you know your guilt,
and your guilt guilt can really get in the way
of being in the flow state you know, of being itself.
So it just feels like a lot of what the
Buddha is saying is not only in line with a
mindfulness state of consciousness where you're always witnessing your you know,

(57:41):
your thought, but also just a way of being that's
very flow like.

Speaker 1 (57:44):
Yeah, but again, what I do wrong? Well, I was close,
I was close. I almost got it.

Speaker 2 (57:54):
I almost got it.

Speaker 1 (57:55):
I maybe misinterpreted like you said, but when I was hearing,
it's almost like you were comparing the two states in
a way instead of seeing that really were cultivating both simultaneously.
They work together. Mindfulness and concentration can be there together,

(58:15):
so that there's both the flow and the awareness or
you could say met the cognition or whatever however you
want to describe being aware of what's happening as well
as being in what's happening.

Speaker 2 (58:30):
Well, that's a great insight.

Speaker 1 (58:32):
And you know, within the Buddhist framework, they talk about
the qualities of mind. They talk about the factors of enlightenment.
Basically there are different lists, but the shorter of the
two lists are the seven factors of mind, which have
to be cultivated and in balanced. So this is a

(58:54):
whole combination of qualities that are integrated in I think
you called it the inner beauty or.

Speaker 2 (59:02):
The inner beauty. Yeah.

Speaker 1 (59:04):
Yeah, So it's not that it's not either we're in
the flow or we're mindful or with this, or that
it's all of it together.

Speaker 2 (59:12):
But is that always the case? I mean, can't you
know not necessarily you can be in like if you
are if you are just a moral human and that
is like, you don't need to like make an effort
to be moral, like you really you're you. You've gotten
to a point in your life where you automatically start
to make decisions in line with your deeper principles and values.

Speaker 1 (59:34):
You're not.

Speaker 2 (59:34):
It's not like every moment you're stopping and thinking yourself, oh,
let me be mindful? Am I being more? I feel
like there are moments where we can get into grooves
or positive habits, positive habits right.

Speaker 1 (59:46):
Yes, But so in the Buddhish psychology they talk about
prompted and unprompted consciousness two different too different way. He's
a moment of consciousness emerges. So when we're first practicing something,

(01:00:06):
it's prompted, you know, and it's like, okay, we have
to keep coming back and reminding ourselves. But at a
certain point of development, it becomes untrumped. Yes, where it's
happening spontaneously.

Speaker 2 (01:00:19):
That's what I'm talking about.

Speaker 1 (01:00:20):
Yes, Yes, but that doesn't mean that that quality is
not there. It just means it doesn't mean that the
mindfulness is not there. It means that the mindfulness then
is untrumpted. It's just part of how we're living.

Speaker 2 (01:00:33):
Oh, I see, I see, Okay, you know good.

Speaker 1 (01:00:37):
Yeah, and it becomes I mean, when something is untrumpted.
I'll give you an example, a really simple example. So
you know, in our meditation practice, we do both sitting
and walking as the primary So people often give to
think that the sitting is the real stuff and the

(01:00:58):
walking is just like a recess between incidents. That is
to really miss. I love the walking practice. So many
insights have come and walking and it's the way of
really integrating mindfulness into one's daily life because we move
a lot. So in the beginning it really was prompted,

(01:01:21):
you know, they had to do the formal walking meditation exercises,
slowing down and really intentionally being mindful of each step.
But at a certain point of development, it really becomes unfraumpted. So,
for example, now after all these years of practice, when
I walk, that's the default. It's just automatically the movements

(01:01:47):
are being known, aware of them, and it doesn't take
any prompting. It's just there. So that becomes in the
flow state.

Speaker 2 (01:01:59):
Yeah, is an ease of being exactly exactly which I love.
I love that I love be having an ease of being.
Now I'm not it's not the same thing, not to
be confused as laziness. Though Let's be let's be clear
that's that wasn't That wasn't an euphemism for I love
it when I don't have to do anything hard. You

(01:02:19):
get it, You get it. Joseph Goldstein, let me end
this interview talking about a word that I am obsessed with. Equanimity.
It's a concept that I you know, there's a lot
of talk about grit, and in my book Transcend, I argued,
I really like the flavor of equanimity better than grit,

(01:02:41):
sometimes the way, the way, at least the grit, the
way it's it's applied. You know, grit has this kind
of connotation that you just no matter the consequences on others,
you're kind of just churning out and persevering, and you're
climbing to the top of the mountain. And even if
you climbed on top of other people on the way there,
you still score high on grit. But equanimity correct me

(01:03:05):
if I'm wrong, But what I what I My understanding
of the concept of equanimity is it is very much
tied to having resiliency and being able to withstand life's challenges.
But there's a sort of way of being baked into
it of warmth and love, and my readings is there
is some warmth there to a certain degree, and a

(01:03:25):
sort of awareness of the impact of your being on others,
even as your surmounting the obstacles. So is any of
that true what I just said?

Speaker 1 (01:03:37):
Yeah, I think I think it is.

Speaker 2 (01:03:39):
There's a large grain of truth.

Speaker 1 (01:03:41):
Yeah, I'm just trying to let's let's just try this out.
And I don't know whether this will reflect at least
some aspect of what you just said.

Speaker 2 (01:03:51):
But let's try.

Speaker 1 (01:03:52):
I think it might, think it might. So it's highlighting
the difference between reactivity and responsibles. So in a situation
where just in different life situations and normally people are
just reactive based on their own personalities and conditioning, and

(01:04:13):
in that reactive state, it can very often be born
out of unwholesome mind states. You know, we're reacting either
with anger or with fear, or with greed or whatever.
There's a situation and there's that reactivity. So that's not equimic.
We could almost say reactivity is the opposite of equanimity.

(01:04:35):
So equanimity in for the purpose of this little discussion,
I think responsiveness captures it more because responsiveness, in my experience,
the feeling of responsiveness comes when we're not being reactive

(01:04:56):
and there's just an kind of an immediate in two.
You might call it warmth or connectedness. You see somebody
who's hungry, you feed them. You you're just different situations
and you're responsive to the situation, but not based on
your reactive conditioning, but based on equanimity really means impartiality.

(01:05:25):
You know, we're we're, we're. So it's often likened to space,
but a responsive space, you know, it's a space that
can hold everything, and so it sees all the sides
of everything. Yeah, and I've just I've just really appreciated

(01:05:47):
for myself the retranslation of compassion to to responsiveness. But
that compassion doesn't necessary zero. They have to be a
particular feeling. It's like tech handset. Compassion is the verb, right,

(01:06:09):
because it's that movement to help or to respond, you know,
in the best way possible. So that does have that
quality of warmth to it, and it really comes out
of the ground of equanimity rather than the ground of reactivity.

(01:06:29):
It's the reactivity really hinders that, but.

Speaker 2 (01:06:33):
It can still lead to resilience and being able to
requity equanimity.

Speaker 1 (01:06:39):
Oh absolutely, it is completely resilient because it's like empty
space that just is responding to whatever is horizon. So
I think it's the essence of resiliency.

Speaker 2 (01:06:52):
I do, true, I do true, But it just in
a way that is aware, aware of your surroundings.

Speaker 1 (01:07:02):
Yes, I like about it, Yes, yes, yes.

Speaker 2 (01:07:06):
You've made a point in one of your interviews about
the kind of wisdom that the society needs right now
because we live in such a polarized country right now,
put in so many different ways, and you argued we
equanimity and compassion were the two biggies. So I was

(01:07:26):
trying to get us there, you know, to end this interview.
But I love that. Do you want to expound it
all on what a deep integration of those two look
like and how it can help us listen more to
each other's pain because I do feel like there's so
much kind of siloed victimhood so to speak, right now,
that we're not listening to other people's pains.

Speaker 1 (01:07:49):
Oh so, kind of to simplify it, within the Buddhist teachings.
It said that compassion arises when we're willing to come
close to suffering, whether it's our own or somebody else's.

(01:08:09):
And this is not a given because a very habituated
response is we see suffering and we don't like it,
you know, it's unpleasant. We want to get rid of it.
We don't want to come close to it, right, But
that closes off the wellspring of compassion. So compassion requires

(01:08:31):
coming close to it or letting it in. That's made
possible by equanimity, by non reactivity. When the mind is
in balance and open and spacious and space like, then
we're not in a reactive, aversive or denial role with

(01:08:52):
respect to suffering. We're just there and we are letting
it in, coming close to it. And that's wee ically
what gives your eyes to compassionate response, you know, So
the two really work together. I'll just give you kind
of a personal example of this. This goes back many years,

(01:09:13):
my days in India when I was practicing, and anybody
who's been there, in those they're just a lot of
wild dogs, im pitiable conditions, just starving and mange and
just terrible, terrible conditions. So I'd be. I was there
practicing and then in between retreats and go into the town,

(01:09:36):
you know, and sitting a little chai shop, t shop
and tease and sweet, just relaxing, and often it would
be these wild, mangy, suffering dogs coming up. And I
saw two very different responses in my mind. Sometimes I
just don't want to deal with it. I just want

(01:09:57):
to have my team sweets. Yeah, And I could feel
myself just trying to close it, close it off, you know,
or shut it out. And so I got just into
my contracted space, thinking that that's what would make me
have it. I just want to enjoy my enjoy my team.
And other times i'd be sitting there, i'd just be

(01:10:19):
in a different space and really let it in so
I see the dogs and really take it in. And
the response then was so I would just you know,
to us with a little scalp of food. I would
be responding to the suffering. It's not that it's solved
the problem of you know, all these wild dogs in India,

(01:10:42):
but in the moment, it was a compassionate response. And
it all happened because I let the suffering in as
opposed to keeping it out. That's good you know, and
so I think it's really interesting. You know, what do
we do when we pass homeless people the street, or

(01:11:03):
differences there are may be in different situations, suffering that
we may not part of our minds, may not want
to open. It's too much. I don't want to deal
with this. Just let me, let me live my life.
But that is a very contracted space, and when we're

(01:11:24):
open to it, then there's a responsiveness whatever it may be,
you know, and I mean it could be something really
small and very little. Maybe he's making eye contact with
the homeless something. You know. It doesn't have to be
solved with the whole problem, but there's a connection I love,
and that connection is coming out of some sense of compassion.

(01:11:47):
We'd let this suffering in and there's a responsiveness to it.
So that's why equanimitating compassion really serve each other and
support each other.

Speaker 2 (01:11:56):
That makes a lot of sense. At the very beginning
of this interview, you defined you revised your revised definition
of enlightenment as lightening up. I've noticed, just a personal observation.
I've noticed that profound narcissists very rarely laugh at themselves exactly.
They're so serious. I mean, I mean they're they're very

(01:12:20):
They might joke at the expense of someone else, but
you very rarely see them lighten up their self.

Speaker 1 (01:12:28):
Yes, exactly.

Speaker 2 (01:12:29):
So look, I'm just bringing this whole interview full circle
to end here. You know, I think that if everyone
wiightened up a little bit in our society today, you know,
we we could lower our ego and and let in
the suffering of others and put that within our circle,
you know, of what's valuable and what's in our attention

(01:12:51):
that we want to pay attention to and to help,
and the world would probably be a better place. So absolutely,
just to integrate everything that they're there to we talked
about at the end of it, Thank you so much.
You are so full wisdom, and I can say that
I know you would never say that to me, but
you know, you're so humble, but I really do think

(01:13:11):
you are so full wisdom, and I consider it an
absoute honor to be able to talk to you today.
So thank you.

Speaker 1 (01:13:16):
Oh it's a pleasure.

Speaker 2 (01:13:18):
Thank you, thank you, thank you, thank you. Thanks for
listening to this episode of the Psychology Podcast. If you'd
like to react in some way to something you heard,
I encourage you to join in the discussion at thus
psychology podcast dot com or on our YouTube page, The

(01:13:40):
Psychology Podcast. We also put up some videos of some
episodes on our YouTube page as well, so you'll want
to check that out. Thanks for being such a great
supporter of the show, and tune in next time for
more on the mind, brain, behavior, and creativity.

All Episodes

Episode Transcript

Host

Scott Barry Kaufman

Popular Podcasts

40s and Free Agents: NFL Draft Season

Dateline NBC

The Bobby Bones Show

.css-15opob5{left:0;position:absolute;top:0.8rem;} All Episodes

.css-14f5ked{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:2;overflow:hidden;}Buddhism and the Impermanence of Life || Joseph Goldstein