Over my centring (chs 9 and 10) I got deeply involved in the emotional work, and I lost direction. I thought I was doing the right stuff, but over a period of time my sleep was completely disoriented – my sleep patterns are very vulnerable but are often a guide as to whether my path is correct. In the end when I couldn’t sleep at night I just got up and meditated. I went through concentrated meditation (45 mins break 45 mins break etc.) until it became clear that I had lost direction.

Now the truth about direction is that we never lose it, the mind just blocks access to it. Our true path is just authentic desire, tru path and authentic desire are synonymous. What was happening to me especially with regards to ch 10 was that I was only focussing on the integration of my shadow, and I had lost my overall sense of purpose, my authentic desire. Through the meditation I cleared away the emotional blocks, and began to see my true path again; I describe this as going through a process of further mental development to enable me to feel my authentic desire again. I call this bhavana. In a sense what I did was to integrate my mind with my emotions through this bhavana, and once integrated the true path, authentic desire, was clear – in a sense reasserted itself.

I should not have been surprised about this because much of my work on the path has been concerned with bhavana through Buddhism. With my upheaval at 23 a major fragment started following the path. This fragmented following of the path did have some form of integration as it had been formed by an overall repression, across the board in terms of the 5 khandhas. However I always had a leaning towards the mental, and through spiritual study the mind developed. In my adult life, post-upheaval, I began to grow as a person through experience whilst being on the path. My path was nowhere near complete but it was probably integrated to a certain extent. Early on the path it was much about love. I had decided through compassion to teach but was generally learning to love. This hit a block with Peyton Place where I loved but suffered, although I met love once after there was never the need to learn to love. Once I had the Nyanga process I ended most of the suffering but it was only in retirement that I really understood how important it was to have loved, and why in that loving I was able to love in general – although never loving another person with the same intensity again. Of course that level of love was unrealistic, it was more that I believed in cosmic love, and when I found Peyton I cosmically loved her – and then suffered cosmic pain. But of course the cosmic Peyton was a creation in my mind because I wanted to love cosmically, the real Peyton could never live up to that. It was not however these expectations that caused the hurt but that is personal.

A year or so before I retired I realised that being a teacher in the system was so distant from my path that it was always a wrench to return to teaching from the holidays where I was more my authentic self. The part of my authentic self that worked in the community was still a teacher as evidenced by the 7 years or so I did volunteer teaching – on my terms (as well as the private tuition), but for the rest there was a need to study Buddhism. I had decided I was a Buddhist 7 years earlier, and had begun studying it, but the most important change was regular meditation, and that meditation I geared towards bhavana – mental development. When I retired I also focussed on bhavana – selected bhavana because that was how I interpreted the teachings.

The Treatise is an overview of how my Path developed so it did include elements of body and energy as described in the 3 tenets, but because of personal leanings my Path was mostly about mind – bhavana/mental development. Once being Buddhist I was meditating and for me that became mostly about mind. Key stages along this mental development were the recognition of the importance of sila, without sila the mind can never be calm. This is not the sila of outer morality but the sila-consciousness that comes from the path (my soul if you like) or my conscience – the sila-consciousness that is authentic self. I choose the term sila-consciousness as sila sounds like a specific moral code whereas sila-consciousness is connected to sunnata, derives from source-consciousness.

Then I learned about how egos are conditioned (discussed in Treatise Ch22 that I call addiction), and how to try to detach from them. Then I learned about desire that is not authentic, how consciousness clinging to that inauthentic desire causes suffering, and how consciousness can let go of these inauthentic desires; developing the mind through sila-consciousness, the 5th chakra, taught me about these inauthentic desires. Developing the mind through detachment enabled further insight, insight had always been there occasionally but in meditation it became more frequent. Developing the mind so that it was clear and not continually concocting mental chatter brought some calm and peace – atammayata, my word for the 6th chakra. All of this bhavana helped free the mind from all the attachments and defilements that were preventing consciousness from connecting to source consciousness. In other words bhavana helped remove all the false selves and open me up to authentic self, it helped me move beyond the conditioning and transcend partially. At that point bhavana had developed so that consciousness removed itself from the I and mine of the other khandhas and enabled transcendence.

What is important to understand is that without bhavana it is not likely that we will find our authenticity. Through our conditioning (upbringing and conditioning – social and personal) our minds become cluttered with attachments. Further our minds cling to conditioned desires, and become full of defilements. It is not usual for these detachments and defilements to fall away without any work – without any bhavana. But once we have removed defilements and then detachments, we are free to follow our true paths – free to recognise our authentic desire. Without bhavana there is not sila-consciousness enabling us to discern authentic desire – to differentiate desires. Our neighbour’s wife is beautiful and she is a spiritual person. She ticks many boxes that we might be seeking. Without sila-consciousness we might choose to engage in an inappropriate relationship, but sila-consciousness enables us to continue a respectful human friendship that is not made destructive by desire.

I would like to give you a meme about how bhavana follows the true path:-





Now the basis of this is that bhavana develops the state of mind that enables consciousness to integrate the selves, move beyond conditioning, develop the mind so that it is not concocting through attachment to sense events. So consciousness can transcend to connect with sunnata or source-consciousness. This meme is based on what Venerable Buddhadasa said “removing “I” and mine from the 5 khandhas”. Now the 5 khandhas are rupa – body, vedana – feelings, sanna – perceptions and memories, sankhara – mental processes, and vinnana – consciousness. So far in the manual I have not discussed the body, but in ch10 on the shadow work I discussed integrating shadow and once integrated there is no attached consciousness so it is free to transcend. I can see shadow work as freeing vedana and sanna from attached consciousness, I hope you can too.

Now I mentioned sankhara as mental proliferations throughout the first part of the manual. The ego becomes preoccupied with attaching to isms, this is how our education conditions us, fills us with words, theories and proofs, not enabling the mental processes to be used by consciousness to discern. If consciousness does not attach to mental conditioning and does not “create” endless proliferations it is free to transcend. This is what Venerable Buddhadasa describes as atammayata -“unconcoctability”, where positive or negative feelings for events do not lead to attachment. In this meme, I am effectively saying that bhavana helps us move beyond mental conditioning, and if we reach a state of atammayata consciousness is free to transcend to sunnata/source consciousness.

To become authentic, to follow our true paths, then we need to integrate body, energy and mind. This theme began in the Treatise, developed in the shadow work of ch 10, and with the bhavana of this chapter consciousness can connect with source consciousness – be authentic, follow the true path.

In the Treatise I spoke more of the body, I now wish to discuss it here. In the Treatise I spoke more of the body, I now wish to discuss it here. Integrating your body is discussed little spiritually but it is important. From the Treatise I came from the opposite direction. A health problem later in life had taken me to macrobiotics, and I found in mb people a total emphasis on healing through food and not enough on broader integration. But even their emphasis on the body has a certain lack.

The key is love, we have to love our bodies. Each of our organs, our bodies as a whole, all have consciousnesses, and if there is consciousness we need love. Throughout the Treatise and Manual I come from the position of experience, what I ask you to consider is something I have already done, but in this case I am only just beginning to love my body. And it is hard at my age. Because of the lack of love and attention when younger, natural ageing is taking its toll a bit too much. I love my body some of the time but there are times because of previous inattentiveness my body can’t cope with what my mind wants.

This has been a life problem for me – what my mind wants; this is an imbalance I have previously discussed.

I never started my life loving my body because I grew up rejecting male vanity - I did not care about the strutting of men. This rejection carried with it a rejection of what was important spiritually – to love my body. Beginning my second childhood with alcohol was not a good start in this loving. So although with the upheaval the major fragment was in a strong integrated position, it had fragmented the body because of this rejection of male vanity amongst others – mostly I was not aware enough to take care of my body because I was young and youthful bodies can look after themselves – and pay later.

I did however manage vegetarianism but this had no healthy emphasis, and whilst it was more healthy than a meat-dominated diet it was not healthy – the diet still had many factory-produced products with their many toxic preservatives and flavourings; and the diet was dominated by milk products.

I would love to be able to say that I am now vegan as I do respect and love life, but I am not. At 55 I became mb as I had developed digestive issues. Coming from vegetarianism I chose vegan mb, and for 5 years my body began to heal, but I was conscious of potential B12 deficiency and introduced fish into my diet – the usual mb route. But after these 5 years, instead of the healing continuing I developed regular flus which I thought came from natural hormone changes when ageing. Not trusting western healing because of its control by BigPharma - through control of medical boards in teaching establishments and through the doctors’ reliance on pharmaceutical reps to advise on drugs for new treatments, I was treated by an acupuncturist. Being Chinese-trained her acupuncture approach was concerned with balancing yin-yang as of course mb is. But my diet was very yin-oriented coming from veganism, and she was always distrustful of my dietary approach. I had a heart issue and she told me to eat some meat – a yang food, and with a little bit of meat each day I have had no flus and no heart issues. My body had told the vegan mind to eat meat.

It makes me sad to write this but I have to – I have to be honest and my body wants some meat and fish – wants to be yang. Notice I am talking about what my body wants, I am not talking about what your body wants. In loving my body I have to listen to what my body wants, and at my age, 67, it has told me some meat. This makes me sad because I know how humans treat animals in the meat industry, but my veganism was weakening my heart. I envy healthy vegans, I would love to be one. Perhaps if I had started with veganism when young, perhaps if I had been more loving with my diet when younger, I would not be eating meat now. But I know what my body wants, and part of loving my body is listening to it. When I look around and see the support for veganism I want to give support because of my love for life, but I have to be sheepish because of my body’s needs. But I still strongly advocate for the humane treatment of animals in our food production, and whilst vegans might liberate animals this is not their emphasis. Their emphasis is a demand for veganism, and because I love my body I cannot comply with that. And for vegans and vegetarians I have been honest about this in case it affects you. Learn to love your body and listen in case this is happening to you.

“You are what you eat” is a standard food mantra. Through changes in diet my body is relatively healthy and there is limited toxic intake for my liver to deal with. But there is more I could do but it doesn’t work for me. In this clip Teal talks about “loving her food”, and about how she creates a loving environment with family when eating food. Being single I don’t have that environment, and although I could love food preparation, I am far more functional about it. My food is what my body needs, it is not something I love. Because of my mind-orientation, I know this is something I should do but I focus on mind.

What I want to highlight here is the importance of integration, and to do this I want to look at Venerable Buddhadasa when he discussed anapanasati-bhavana – the 4 tetrads of anapanasati – kaya, vedana, citta, and dhamma. These 4 tetrads I am going to call, body, energy, mind and Gaia.

For Venerable Buddhadasa there appears to be no shadow work, he integrates body, energy/emotions/feelings, and mind through anapanasati – the Buddha’s technique he describes in his book Anapanasati – Mindfulness of Breathing. In my own case this didn’t work, and I needed a process of centring that I have described in ch 10 to integrate my shadow.

Through an integration filter the approach of Buddhism can be questioned, there is a strong emphasis on bhavana, and that risks the integration of body, energy and mind. I want to attest that bhavana gave me some form of fragmented transcendence. I cannot know whether shadow work can give fragmented transcendence but it is important to know that it is mind through consciousness that transcends once we are integrated. It is consciousness that integrates. At some point mind must develop so that it is able to integrate and then transcend.

Compared with the meme on Authentic True Path I have this meme that describes my own progress:-



By the use of the word “token” I am saying that the approach is there in the teachings of the 4 tetrads, but the practice doesn’t always fit with the theory.

I want to consider whether this lack of integration in me is indicative of a lack of integration in Buddhism, and how the teaching of integration works in Buddhism. I know Buddhism a bit, that is why I can describe it but I suspect the lack of integration affects other spiritual traditions as well. Now the issue is effectively a “teaching” issue, what is taught is not what students learn. What is learnt is only part of what is taught, and that part is effectively the emphasis of the teacher or teachings. The issue I have is how much is integration emphasised.

This is not a criticism of what the Buddha taught but a distortion that has come over time to the way others teach “what the Buddha taught”, and sadly I have to include Venerable Buddhadasa in this. This is not a criticism of Venerable Buddhadasa himself, he is now dead, I never met him, and his insight to me demonstrates a complete integration that I can only hope to aspire to. Not only that but in anapanasati-bhavana and in his quote “removing the I and mine from the 5 khandhas”, it is clear that integration is part of his teaching.

But is there a selectivity, an emphasis in teaching, that does not promote integration. I think such a selectivity can be best understood by the important teaching of atammayata. This unconcoctability is based on the khandha vedana concocting the mind through sankhara, and once concocted there is ego leading to suffering. In this series of talks Venerable Buddhadasa describes how atammayata does this – a very good teaching.

But my concern is with the emphasis of his teachings on the other khandhas specifically vedana and sanna. To explain this I want to use this meme that I made based on a talk Santikaro ( Still Water Flowing Banks) gave as to where Venerable Buddhadasa was heading at his death:-



Remove I and mine from the 5 khandhas (body, psyche and consciousness), remove the I from self and there is connection to sunnata – my summary.

In the meme the psyche represents energy and mind as in vedana and sanna as energy and sankhara as part of mind. The emphasis in Buddhism is on the mind. I have much to learn of the work done on the mind as atammayata based on the khandha “sankhara”, but here my enquiry is concerned with the work done on vedana and sanna. I think it would be fair to describe vedana and sanna as feelings, perceptions and memory, and if we think of those words then it is not a great jump to look at shadow work and the need to integrate the shadow. In my summary above I talked of “removing I and mine from the 5 khandhas” so this would include removing I and mine from the khandhas of vedana and sanna – feelings, perceptions and memories – as well of course as removal of I from sankhara. Now the removal of I from sankhara is covered in bucketloads in Buddhism, but I have to ask how much is done on the removal of I and mine from sanna and vedana.

This emphasis on sankhara is prevalent in Buddhism. When Venerable Buddhadasa is talking of unconcoctability in atammayata, it can be seen in all the concoctions of Buddhist theory. For a religion of anatta why are there so many proliferations (attachments to sankhara)?

For some Buddhists there is not even a focus on transcendence, with Buddhism for some being seen as an understanding of all the theories that make up sankhara. For other Buddhists there is the focus on transcendence but in the end it appears as if that transcendence is only concerned with the partial self of sankhara – or perhaps rupa (body) and sankhara (thought including concoctions and mental proliferations).

Venerable Buddhadasa teaches anapanasati (mindfulness of breathing) as the practice of which atammayata is the result. Within this practice it would be hard not to detach from the selves (egos) that are within the shadow. But integrating the shadow egos and detaching from them is not a focus, and I question whether that is a weakness.

Wider Buddhism creates objectives such as mindfulness, it could be perceived as a failing within Buddhism if there is not 24/7 mindfulness. I subscribe to the Agreement (AppA) “Always do the best you can” but don’t beat yourself up about it. 24/7 mindfulness is hard, something I cannot do – an enlightenment characteristic? “Don’t beat yourself up about it” was a phrase a Buddhist abbot used to me as a description of how to approach these things, but is that a general approach? Do Buddhists consider themselves failures with 3/7 mindfulness? Do Buddhists consider themselves failures when the mind is not still in meditation? Do Eckhart’s followers consider themselves failures if they cannot feel presence – cannot feel the Power of Now?

When you look at Buddhism it might be fairer to say “be mindful 24/7 but don’t beat yourself up about it”, but does it come across that way? I might be prepared to say that Thich Nhat Hanh was 24/7 mindfulness but few others. I am not saying such teachers claim 24/7 mindfulness but maybe there is an implication on their part – and maybe a projection on the part of their students.

I have discussed the teachings of Venerable Buddhadasa of which I know a little. But Buddhism is much wider than his teachings yet I feel the approach is similar. To me what is clear is that there is not a focus on integration, myself in Buddhism is an example. The teachings might contain integration but the emphasis is very much on transcending through mind; this is a weakness. How might this weakness show itself? When psychologists talk of shadow work, it is because what has been repressed in shadow becomes expressed in normal life but beyond the control of the person concerned. The spiritual world is continually being rocked by sex scandals, desire that has not been integrated. Whilst the teaching of 4NT does not talk of repressing desire - it talks of not attaching to desire, for many 4NT might lead to repression of desire. What happens to natural desires of young male monks? There has to be a balanced integrated approach, only the monks and their teachers know if such balance exists; the number of scandals indicate that there is repression rather than balance.

Reflecting on my own progress I don’t feel this sankhara selectivity weakness greatly affected me. What is perhaps hard for a reader to understand is how much of the authentic me was fragmented and how little remained unconscious. The unconscious part, conscious prior to the upheaval, coped with the repression and focussed on the middle-class “way” of education, sports etc, the only awareness I needed was that which was sufficient to cope with the maths degree. So after the upheaval a major part of me was integrated on the path. But that part had been fragmented and was therefore immature so my “second childhood” on the path was relatively authentic and balanced. Once my work took me away from the path, it was Buddhism I turned to, and it was mental development I chose. Because of the “size” of the major fragment this Summer of integrating shadow was icing on the cake. For me as a writer what has happened this Summer is more important in showing me the importance of integration, and the need for completeness. I will seek to promote the integrative aspects as described in Venerable Buddhadasa’s anapanasati-bhavana encapsulated in the “removing of I and mine from the 5 khandhas”.

But what is important to understand is that there is still a weakness here. Even if we have integrated mind, energy and body, there is not complete integration because we have to understand how we fit into the fourth tetrad – for Venerable Buddhadasa, dhamma, what I have taken to calling Gaia-consciousness.

Next/Contents/Previous