Category: Buddhism

Malignant narcissism and identity

~ ABN ~ Leave a comment

Malignant narcissism is an extreme form of narcissism characterized by aggression against people who threaten the narcissist’s narcissistic supply.

A malignant narcissist sees the other person as the threat, not just what they say or do.

This makes sense in that a narcissist has at some level concluded that they as a person are the standard for all things; thus, other people are blamed and attacked far out of proportion to whatever the narcissist believes they have done.

In Christian terms, the malignant narcissist blames the sinner not the sin and thus attacks the sinner, even when the sin may be as mild as a withheld compliment or a deserved rebuke.

I think all narcissists behave in a manner similar to this, though the ordinary type, which is very common in this world, is less aggressive than the malignant type.

Since narcissism is so common, one can say that in some ways narcissists have good reason to be suspicious of others and take revenge on them. There really is a good chance that they are dealing with another narcissist, who will do the same to them if they get the chance.

In a previous post, I wrote about the vortex or tautology of identity, the tautology of basing our identity on a semiotic matrix that, by its very nature, always refers back to the same “identity.” A malignant narcissist is an extreme example of this problem.

The semiotics of malignant narcissism are such that the narcissist sees his or her identity as being the person they really are. Seeing themselves in this way, narcissists apply a similar logic to others—at their core they are people who must be opposed or attacked for even the slightest perceived offense.

A group example of extreme malignant narcissism might be North Korea. If an NK citizen makes a single mistake—even a slight verbal mistake—they run the risk of being executed and also having three generations of their family sent to prison for life. The reasoning is that the original offender is a very bad person, which can be known from what they said. And since they are very bad, they must have influenced every person in their family who is younger than them and been influenced by every person in their family who is older than them.

If that isn’t hell on earth, I don’t know what is.

It is my belief that most groups, even very cute and nice ones, tend toward narcissism and many of them tend toward and become malignantly narcissistic. This happens because groups form and maintain themselves on the basis of shared semiotics, which necessarily are formulaic or simplistic.

We can see malignant narcissism in many religious, political, nationalist, or ethnic groups. The clearest sign is a disproportionate response to criticism—banishment, murder, violence, loss of employment, etc.—but narcissistic groups can also be clever and hide these responses or delay them long enough that the connection to the “offense” is hard to see.

Just as narcissistic groups cannot bear criticism, even self-criticism from within, so individual narcissists are bad at introspection. For either one, to honestly view and assess the core value (me!) is to destroy the false identity. For either one (group or individual) this would be a wonderful thing for them and others, but it is hard to do because their semiotic matrix is a tautology and they cannot admit this, or usually even see it.

Identity as a vortex or tautology

~ ABN ~ Leave a comment

Our identities are fundamentally made up of semiotic matrices. That is to say, in part, that our identities have meaning; they mean something to us.

Often they mean a great deal to us and from them we derive the semiotics of motivation, intention, life-plans, many of our central interests, and so on.

Identities have strong emotional components, to be sure, but our emotions are ambiguous or diffuse if they are not positioned on a semiotic matrix and focused or defined by that matrix.

Identity is usually tautological in that its components, interests, and associations tend always to lead back to a few central elements. Often these elements have been inculcated in us by training. Some, we learn on our own. These elements are our values and beliefs, and also how these values and beliefs are understood and pursued.

The semiotics of identity must mean something to the person identifying with them. In this sense, they are almost always tautological. I do what I do because that is how I learned how to do it, think it, feel it, perceive it.

Most people are more adept at moving the parts of language around than they are at moving semiotic elements around. When semiotics are unconscious, they act like a vortex pulling perception, emotion, and understanding always toward the center of the identity. I think this is another way to say, in the Buddhist sense, that the self is empty; that it has no “own being.”

We can pursue an understanding of an empty self through Buddhist thought and practice, but we will get better results more quickly if we add a practice that deals directly with the semiotics of our identities.

Since there is no book you can go to to look up how your unique semiotics of identity works, you have to see for yourself how it works. You can do much of this on your own, but eventually you will need a partner because there is no way you will be able to get an objective perspective on yourself acting alone.

FIML practice is the only way I know of to fully see into and through the semiotics of your “identity.” Beneath identity there is a sort of artesian well of pure, undefined consciousness. FIML helps us experience that well while keeping us from rushing back into the tautological matrix of identity or static self-definition and clinging to it.

FIML is able to do this because FIML is process. FIML itself has no definition, only a procedure. It is not a tautology because it has no semiotic boundaries.

Identity and signaling

~ ABN ~ Leave a comment

Identity is constructed of memories, memories that have to be tended to, and this takes time and energy.

You have to remember who you are and often have to work pretty hard just to maintain that image within yourself, to say nothing of projecting it toward other people and getting them to accept it.

A big problem with this way of constructing a “self,” an identity, is it’s probably based on misinterpretations and a good deal of self-deceit.

Our identities, such that they are, are complex fictions. They are a central flaw in our internal signaling system.

If your identity is large and complex, it will use a good deal of energy. As you signal internally to yourself about your identity, you will also be receiving signals from other people, and these signals will necessarily be processed by your large and complex identity. And that, of course, will lead to serious misinterpretations, both internal and external.

If you belong to a group that defines, or helps you define, your identity, you can save some energy but will have as much fiction, maybe even worse fiction.

Consider the codes of group behavior (group signaling)  for Stalin’s NKVD officers who purged so many millions of innocents in the 1930s. All of those officers had identities that were largely determined by signals coming from the NKVD and Joseph Stalin.

There was a weird sort of ethical behavior among those officers in that they were trying to adhere to a group signaling system and not go their own way. This same problem in less serious form can be observed all over the world in every culture.

One problem with ethics and ethical signaling within groups is ethical questions can be difficult. There are few formulas that will always work, and formulas are what hold groups together.

Back to your identity. I hope it is clear that you have to be careful when you base your identity on group signaling systems. If you are a banker, you might do many bad things out of loyalty to your group. Same for all of us.

While ethics are hard to codify, the will to behave ethically is simpler. I want to do the right thing but I don’t always know what it is or how to do it. That is a good statement to make. If you can honestly say that to yourself, that is good because that means that your internal signaling system is seeking greater integrity, great clarity.

When we seek clarity and integrity within our signaling systems, we are seeking better ethics. We are changing our identities, or allowing our identities to be transformed by a higher desire for clarity, purity, integrity, goodness.

When we seek to improve our signaling systems, our ethics, we begin to abandon static identities and poorly constructed fictions about ourselves by subjecting them to a higher order of thought. If we can take a meta-position on ourselves, we will find the process of improving signaling is easier and more enjoyable than clinging to a static fictionalized identity that may have been constructed years before.

Maha-dukkhakkhandha Sutta: The Great Mass of Stress

~ ABN ~ Leave a comment
translated from the Pali by
Thanissaro Bhikkhu

I have heard that on one occasion the Blessed One was staying near Savatthi at Jeta’s Grove, Anathapindika’s monastery. Then, early in the morning, several monks put on their robes and, carrying their bowls and outer robes, went into Savatthi for alms. The thought occurred to them, “It’s still too early to go into Savatthi for alms. What if we were to visit the park of the wanderers of other persuasions?”

So they headed to the park of the wanderers of other persuasions. On arrival, they exchanged courteous greetings with the wanderers of other persuasions. After an exchange of friendly greetings & courtesies, they sat to one side. As they were sitting there, the wanderers of other persuasions said to them, “Friends, Gotama the contemplative describes the comprehension of sensuality. We, too, describe the comprehension of sensuality. He describes the comprehension of forms. We, too, describe the comprehension of forms. He describes the comprehension of feelings. We, too, describe the comprehension of feelings. So what is the difference, what the distinction, what the distinguishing factor between him and us in terms of his teaching and ours, his message and ours?”

Continue reading…

Repost: Why you can’t fix it with generalities

~ ABN ~ Leave a comment

Psychological, cognitive, emotional, or communicative problems cannot be fundamentally corrected by using general analyses or generalized procedures. You can teach someone to think and see differently, even to behave differently, by such procedures, but you cannot bring about deep change by using them. The reason this is so is change through generalizations does little more than substitute one external semiosis for another. The person seeking change will not experience deep change because all they are essentially doing is importing a different explanation of their “condition” into their life.

This happens with Buddhists who remain attached to surface meanings of the Dharma as well as to people seeking mainstream help for emotional problems. Any change will feel good for a while in most cases, but after some time stasis and a recurrence of the original problem, or something similar to it, will occur.

Continue reading…

Eight guys save a small girl

~ ABN ~ Leave a comment

 

 

One of these guys notices a small girl on the fourth floor about to fall. The rest come to help. One broke his arm and another hurt his neck. The girl is unharmed.

This video reminds me of the ancient Chinese philosopher Mencius who said that people are fundamentally good. One way he showed that was with the thought experiment that there are very few of us who would not rush to save a child about to fall into a well. As you watch this video, I bet you feel good seeing the girl saved, which shows the same thing in another way.

Five myths about privacy

~ ABN ~ Leave a comment

Source

I am on vacation and so have been slow to add new material to this blog. The linked article is interesting and worth reading, but I chose to post it mainly for the following sentences, which have a wonderful Buddhist-American ring to them:

Even if a person is doing nothing wrong, in a free society, that person shouldn’t have to justify every action that government officials might view as suspicious. A key component of freedom is not having to worry about how to explain oneself all the time.

So agree with that and believe it should also apply to friends and colleagues. That may sound opposite to FIML practice where we say that all contretemps should be fully analyzed/explained, but it really isn’t. FIML is about finding deep freedom to communicate honestly with your partner. It doesn’t require you to justify everything you do, but rather provides a chance to speak deeply without fear of being misunderstood and judged wrongly.

Consciousness After Death: Strange Tales From the Frontiers of Resuscitation Medicine

~ ABN ~ Leave a comment

Source

The main substance of the linked piece is an interview with Sam Parnia, who practices resuscitation medicine. Below is a quote from the interview.

It takes time for cells to die after they’re deprived of oxygen. It doesn’t happen instantly. We have a longer period of time than people perceive. We know now that when you become a corpse, when the doctor declares you dead, there’s still a possibility, from a biological and medical perspective, of death being reversed. – Sam Parnia

In Buddhist traditions it is widely believed that consciousness stays with or near the body long after the point in time that standard Western medicine says this is not possible.

Mindfulness

~ ABN ~ Leave a comment

 

And what, monks, is the faculty of mindfulness? Herein, monks, a noble disciple is mindful and is endowed with the highest prudence in mindfulness; he is one who remembers and recollects even what is done or said long ago. This, monks, is called the faculty of mindfulness.

— S V 197 (Source)

Forgiveness

~ ABN ~ Leave a comment

We don’t have the power to forgive. But we can hope that those who have harmed us will feel shame and reform.

That outcome—their feeling shame and reforming—is far better than our forgiving them and  infinitely better than wishing harm on them, wishing for revenge.

Forgiveness should mean “forbear until those who have harmed us reform.”

When we have been harmed we have a choice between forbearance and revenge. If we choose revenge our minds will be clouded and we will bring more harm into the world. If we forbear, the harm that has been done will stop with us.

And if, as we forbear, we hope—indeed, pray—that those who have harmed us reform, we will feel little or no need to want revenge. The desire for revenge will be weak if it arises at all. For what could be better than the person who has harmed us reforming completely? That is, feeling shame, vowing never to repeat their harmful act, making amends for their harm.

What could be better than that?

We do not desire that the person who has harmed us feel shame to cause them pain, but only because shame is essential to reform, to making the vow to never repeat the harmful act against anyone. Shame cleanses the harm and ensures it will not recur.

When we have been harmed, there is nothing better to wish for.

And there is no need for public shame. All that is needed is real shame leading to the complete renunciation of harm.

This is how all of us—for all of us have been harmed—can reduce suffering in the world.

FIML and karma

~ ABN ~ Leave a comment

FIML illustrates karma in the sense that karma is an action that initiates a cycle of cause and effect.

For example, if you do not care about what your partner is saying, you will not understand how you are listening and thus you will not understand yourself. If you are not honest with your partner, similarly, you will not be able to perceive the depths of meaning in your own listening and speaking. Your not caring and/or not being honest are actions that will initiate a cycle of delusion, a cycle of less than optimal communication, less than optimal mutual understanding, and less than optimal self-understanding.

You harm yourself when do not care or are not honest. Of course, there are degrees of caring and honesty. But if partners do these actions well-enough, they will see for themselves that caring even more and being even more honest has very real and very important benefits for each of them.

If you care about what your partner is saying, you will come to understand how ideas, values, and meanings actually function in your mind during dynamic moments of communication. And this will save you from a great deal of delusive thinking and feeling. The same is true for being honest. If you are honest with your partner, you will help them free themselves from delusive thinking and feeling. They will see that you are being honest and respect you for that. In return they will be more honest with you.

And all of this will become clearer and clearer to both partners as they progress in FIML practice. These cycle of good karma—good cause and effect—will enrich and liberate both partners

In addition to the above, it is good to see that there are significant selfish reasons to be honest and to care about your partner.

Holocaust: The Ignored Reality

~ ABN ~ Leave a comment

by Timothy Snyder

Link

Well-worth reading.

_____________________

One way to comprehend the madness of the 20th century as described in Snyder’s essay is through semiotics as we define and use the term in FIML practice. In FIML practice the active, functional semiotics of the individual are constantly being questioned and resolved with the help of a partner. Without FIML, individual semiotics are never fully understood by the individual, who is consequently forced to adopt public semiotics to define their, now, entirely elusive “self.”

During the 2oth century, and still today, many people assert public meaning/semiotics in place of having authentic individual comprehension of themselves. The more assertive the person, the more their “meaning” seems to have meaning, or value. Others simply follow assertive people. Dictators and other maniacs described in Snyder’s essay are fundamentally asserting violent public “meaning,” rather than acquiring genuine individual meaning on their own.

This also goes a long way to explain why so much of the world today, as yesterday, willingly follows less violent psychopaths and/or shallow media personalities: their assertions of meaning are simply stronger than what the individual is capable of finding for themselves.

In contrast, individuals who practice FIML will notice that their need to take meaning from strong public-asserters decreases in proportion to their capacity to comprehend their own individual and much more authentic meaning.

On Solitude

~ ABN ~ Leave a comment

On one occasion the Blessed One was staying near Rajagaha in the Bamboo Grove, the squirrels’ sanctuary. Now at that time a certain monk by the name of Elder[1] was one who lived alone and extolled the virtues of living alone. Alone he entered the village for alms, alone he returned, alone he sat withdrawn [in meditation], alone he did walking meditation.

Then a large number of monks went to the Blessed One and, on arrival, having bowed down to him, sat to one side. As they were sitting there, they informed him: “Lord, there is a certain monk by the name of Elder who lives alone and extols the virtues of living alone.”

Then the Blessed One told a certain monk, “Come, monk. In my name, call the monk named Elder, saying, ‘The Teacher calls you, my friend.'”

“As you say, lord,” the monk answered and, having gone to Ven. Elder, on arrival he said, “The Teacher calls you, my friend.”

“As you say, my friend,” Ven. Elder replied. Then he went to the Blessed One and, on arrival, having bowed down to him, sat to one side. As he was sitting there, the Blessed One said to him, “Is it true, Elder, that you live alone and extol the virtues of living alone?”

“Yes, lord.”

“But how do you live alone and extol the virtues of living alone?”

“Lord, alone I enter the village for alms, alone I return, alone I sit withdrawn [in meditation], alone I do walking meditation. That is how I live alone and extol the virtues of living alone.”

“There is that way of living alone, Elder. I don’t say that there isn’t. Still, listen well to how your living alone is perfected in its details, and pay close attention. I will speak.”

“As you say, lord,” Ven. Elder responded.

The Blessed One said: “And how is living alone perfected in its details? There is the case where whatever is past is abandoned, whatever is future is relinquished, and any passion & desire with regard to states of being attained in the present is well subdued.[2] That is how living alone is perfected in its details.”

That is what the Blessed One said. Having said it, the One Well-gone further said this:

“All-conquering, all-knowing, intelligent; with regard to all things, unadhering; all-abandoning, released in the ending of craving: him I call a man who lives alone.”
_____________
translated from the Pali by
Thanissaro Bhikkhu