I just got about fifty pages into the book “The Joy of Living, Unlocking the Secret & Science of Happiness,” by Yongey Mingyur Rinpoche – and had to put it down.

Now, I don’t mean to “put it down,” but I have some serious misgivings about this book.  Misgivings that won’t allow me to continue to read it.

For one thing, I question the persistent use of Buddhism, and the persistent presence of Tibetan Buddhists, in motivational literature.

I question that even more when the literature “merges Eastern and Western views.”

First, Buddhism, at best, is a religion.  Before you read the rest of this, you should read James Carse’s most recent (and excellent) blog entry (and probably his book, too).

In short – in case you don’t have time to do all of that preliminary reading right now – Carse draws a distinction between Finite Games and Infinite Games.  Finite Games are games that are played to win.  There is a Finite end to them.  Infinite Games are games that are played to keep playing.  There is no end to those games.

Now, Carse would rather make the distinction between “belief” (as infinite game) and “religion” (as finite game).  Though I’d say it’s rather different.

A religion is an “infinite game.”  A religion is about Mystery.  It is not necessarily “organized” or “indoctrinated.”  It is a thought, a pattern, a method, a Way, that the religious person carries with them.  Through it, they try to decode the Mystery of What-Is.

An ideology (or what Carse would say is religion) is a finite game.  It is the indoctrination of a religion, a religious belief.  An ideology plays to win.  It pits itself over and against The Other, whatever that Other may be – another religion, another ideology, etc.

My first problem is this – at best, science is religion.  It is a search for the meaning of Mystery.  It is the quest to continue searching.  There is no “end” to true science.  Just as there is no “end” to true religion.  It is a tool for constantly experiencing What-Is.

At worst, science and religion are ideology.  In those instances, as I’ve mentioned, they are pit against other beliefs.  They create the distinction of Self/Other.  They tear apart, break down, set brother against brother.

So, to be clear, the book needs to say what it is talking about.  Is it talking about the religions of Buddhism and science, or the ideologies of Buddhism and science.

Secondly, while I do feel upset about the injustices the Tibetan people have suffered, I disagree with the use of Tibetan Buddhist monks, or Tibetan Buddhism, to promote the cause of Tibet against China.

This, again, is creating an ideology of Buddhism.

Whatever, right?

Now that that’s said, I’ll tell you why I had to put the book down.

There is no mind.

Around page 28 (or the beginning of Chapter 2), the author begins to talk about the mind, and the origin of mind.  Then he talks about the brain, and the fact that the mind cannot be found within the brain.  Rather, he says, the mind is a process, not a static thing.  It cannot be pinpointed because it is constantly moving.

While I agree with the idea of mind-as-process, I think the distinction between mind, brain, and, necessarily, body, points to the Self/Other dialectic in this book.  It points to the place where the author is misguided.

There is no “mind.”

As I mentioned in previous posts, there is no “separation” of the body from the external environment.  The “external environment” is the human “external organ.”  Without it – as without any “internal organ” – the human animal dies.

Similarly, the human animal changes in response to changes in its external organ.  If the external organ is healthy, the animal is healthy.  If the external organ is sick, the animal is sick.  Just as with the internal organs.

Where is the separation?

Finally, find the clear dividing point, where one part of the brain effectively stops, and “the body” begins, and I will nominate you for a Nobel Prize in Godliness.

There is no “clear separation” between the “brain” and “body.”  They are the same thing.  Without a part of your “body,” the part of the “brain” that is associated with that part of the “body” withers and dies.

We could almost say that they were one and the same.

Scientists have found cerebrospinal fluid in collagen tubules throughout the body.  That is – fluid that bathes your spinal cord and brain flows through your entire body.

This should not be surprising.

There is no “dividing line” between your body and itself.

Similarly, there is no “dividing line” between your body and anything else.

The dividing lines that we draw are drawn for the sake of convenience.  Those lines, again, are tools to help us to understand the Mystery, and to work with it effectively.

But they don’t really exist.

In the same way, if you were to look at a map of the countryside, just an aerial photograph, you might say – “Oh look, a river, a  mountain, and a forest.”  But you would all say that they are part of the terrain.  And if you were to cut out any one of those things from the, let’s say square, map, you would say “This map is incomplete.”

Were we to draw state and county lines on the map, you wouldn’t say they were “real.”  They’re effectively real, because we’ve agreed to those terms.  That’s part of the infinite game – the rules of the game we’ve agreed to play.

In the terrain itself, you might walk over that river, through the woods, to grandmother’s house (sound familiar?).  But you wouldn’t say “well, where is the wilderness here?” would you?  It’s all around.  You wouldn’t say “the wilderness is only in the river,” or “only in the forest.”

Looking for “mind” in the body, or even “in the mind” is like looking for the wilderness in the river.  It isn’t there.  It’s in the crunch of the leaves under your feet, and the sound of the squirrel’s alarm-call as you approach.  It’s in the sound of birds’ wings overhead, that look like kites etched against the blue sky.  And it’s the blue sky, and the wind whistling through tree branches.  It’s in the stink of the rotten tree you climbed over and the squirming bodies of the insects you exposed when your foot went through that soft trunk.  It’s in your hands.  It’s in you.  It is you, too.

Mind is the same.  Keep looking for it, Huck Finn.  I have a map for you right here.  You and the other kids can help.

I am glad I read the first 50 pages of this book.  The book was a great help to me, actually.  It helped me to realize that this distinction runs so deeply, and to see the Self/Other dialectic at work in a new way.

But I won’t recommend it.