"the key is balance" (flickr: peacock balancing on a chair- by fishflix- Jeanette Lowe)


you know how its the quite interesting phenomenon how when reads the DSM-IV that one tends to automatically think "oh no, I have this psychiatric disorder! and this one! and this one! or maybe this one!"

well anyway, I've always had this bizarre but unsubstantiated suspicion that maybe 5% of me has Borderline Personality Disorder. Or at least when I read about it and its emotional lability, as well as inability to integrate polarities, I can relate to a certain degree.
So today I discovered Marsha Linehan and her "Dialectical Behavioral Therapy" which was specifically designed to treat individuals with BPD. In many ways similar to Cognitive Behavorial Therapy (a form of therapy I am very familiar with), Dialectical Behavioral Therapy" also integrates the Buddhist concept of mindfulness and the ancient-Greek derived (though also found in Hindu and Buddhist thought) concept of Dialectics.
I realized I didn't know very much about Dialectics and what they were.

Here is an interesting paragraph on the origin of Dialectics and how, in a way, it is applied in Dialectical Behavioral Therapy:

The term 'dialectical' is derived from classical philosophy. It refers to a form of argument in which an assertion is first made about a particular issue (the 'thesis'), the opposing position is then formulated (the 'antithesis' ) and finally a 'synthesis' is sought between the two extremes, embodying the valuable features of each position and resolving any contradictions between the two. This synthesis then acts as the thesis for the next cycle. In this way truth is seen as a process which develops over time in transactions between people. From this perspective there can be no statement representing absolute truth. Truth is approached as the middle way between extremes.

The dialectical approach to understanding and treatment of human problems is therefore non-dogmatic, open and has a systemic and transactional orientation. The dialectical viewpoint underlies the entire structure of therapy, the key dialectic being 'acceptance' on the one hand and 'change' on the other. Thus DBT includes specific techniques of acceptance and validation designed to counter the self-invalidation of the patient. These are balanced by techniques of problem solving to help her learn more adaptive ways of dealing with her difficulties and acquire the skills to do so. Dialectical strategies underlie all aspects of treatment to counter the extreme and rigid thinking encountered in these patients. The dialectical world view is apparent in the three pairs of 'dialectical dilemmas' already described, in the goals of therapy and in the attitudes and communication styles of the therapist which are to be described.The therapy is behavioural in that, without ignoring the past, it focuses on present behaviour and the current factors which are controlling that behaviour.

(source: http://www.mentalhelp.net/poc/view_doc.php?type=doc&id=1020)

I think regardless of mental health diagnoses, as humans we all tend to struggle with polarities, discrepancies in thought, dichotomies in feelings and concepts. According to famous BPD theoriest Otto Kernberg (who a friend of mine had the pleasure of meeting) there are two chief tasks in early childhood one must achieve to be functional adults. The first is differentiating oneself from the world and others. (psychic clarification of self and other)

The second is to "overcome splitting". This task requires one to be able to realize that not all things are put into black and white categories, such as "good" or "bad", "nice" or "mean", "red" or "blue" etc. For example, someone can see oneself as being both good and bad at the same. This task of "overcoming splitting" is the stage which Kernberg theorizes those with BPD never were able to fully acheive. In Dialectical Behavioral Therapy, Linehan uses this system of dialectics to approach the cognitive distortions and "splitting" of life into black and white categories and aids one in reaching a more nuanced, holistic and integrated perception of oneself, one's experiences, and the world around oneself. Avoiding either extreme, it brings to mind the Buddhist concept of the "middle path".

Or as a friend of mine likes to say, "the key is balance".

Ibsen wrote in a letter to his French translator in 1890,

"The title of the play is 'Hedda Gabler'.  My intention in giving it this
name was to indicate that Hedda, as a personality, is to be regarded
rather as her father's daughter than as her husband's wife.
It was not my desire to deal in this play with so-called problems.
What I principally wanted to do was to depict human beings,
human emotions, and human destinies, upon a groundwork of
certain of the social conditions and principles of
the present day."

So I went to see Mary-Louise Parker in Hedda Gabler on Tuesday.
A bit disappointed by the performances, but MLP was brilliant as
always, and I was stunned by the play's depiction of power dynamics,
what one will do when driven by such a desire for power,
and Hedda's "cowardly" inability to trascend her societal circumstances.

HEDDA.
[Looks up at him.]  So I am in your power, Judge Brack.
You have me at your beck and call,
from this time forward.


BRACK.
[Whispers softly.]  Dearest Hedda--
believe me--I shall not abuse my
advantage.


HEDDA.
I am in your power none the less.
Subject to your will and your
demands.  A slave, a slave then!
[Rises impetuously.]  No, I cannot
endure the thought of that!  Never!


BRACK.
[Looks half-mockingly at her.]  People
generally get used to the
inevitable.

HEDDA.
[Returns his look.]  Yes, perhaps.

the faith of john lennon


mp3: John Lennon- God (link removed)

According to Buddhist and Hindu scholar and philosopher Alan Watts in his book The Wisdom of Insecurity, to "believe" is often to have a specific, limiting doctrine or creed to which you are clinging--something which is actually, well, not real. It is like trying to put a gallon of water inside of a paper parcel and mail it to a friend. Instead one must immerse oneself in the river.

On the other hand, "faith" is embracing the river: its perhaps indefinite, amorphous nature and all. Perhaps this is something like Paul Tillich's "ground of all being", though that might be a bit of a stretch in mixing such metaphors.

Watts writes, "And the attitude of faith is the very opposite of clinging to belief, of holding on."

Faith is letting go in trusting and embracing the uncertainty of life and reality, embracing the numinous but terrifying "ultimateness" of existence and experience.

Watts writes in The Wisdom of Insecurity, "But the attitude of faith is to let go, and become open to truth, whatever it might turn out to be. "

As different as Watts and Tillich are in ideology and tradition, I think they both embraced something with similar roots. In many ways I see Watt's surrendering to existence and being itself as different words for Tillich's immanent, infinite, and transcendent.

For me, John Lennon's song God is all about letting go and surrender, about choosing faith over belief.

God

God is a concept by which we can measure our pain.

I'll say it again,

God is a concept by which we can measure our pain.

I don't believe in magic,
I don't believe in I-ching,

I don't believe in Bible,

I don't believe in tarot,

I don't believe in Hitler,

I don't believe in Jesus,

I don't believe in Kennedy,

I don't believe in Buddha,

I don't believe in mantra,

I don't believe in Gita,

I don't believe in yoga,

I don't believe in kings,

I don't believe in Elvis,

I don't believe in Zimmerman,

I don't believe in Beatles,

I just believe in me.

Yoko and me.

And that's reality.

The dream is over, what can I say?

The dream is over.

Yesterday, I was dreamweaver, but now I'm reborn.

I was the walrus, but now I'm John.

And so dear friends,

You just have to carry on,

The dream is over.

musing of the day, courtesy of the one and only "veronica mars":

"Why bother with something not good just because it's something?...
Especially when you know the difference, which not many people do.
You see, I think that's like ninety percent of life, just knowing the difference."

Recently a classmate, while discussing Mormonism in the 19th century west, made a rather bigoted comment, but nonetheless, a comment about mormon underwear. He called it "magic underpants". I had never heard this expression, nor had I heard anyone discuss mormon underwear before, so I was intrigued.

So today I was reading an article in Religion Dispatches, an interview with a mormon woman/blogger. When asked what issues about the church bothers her, she first states,

"I am a fan of modesty, but I am not a big fan of the (under)garments, for instance."

and so the article is titled, Not a Fan of the Undergarments.

I wonder what the women on "Big Love" wear to bed..I haven't watched it.

The Church of LDS issued an official press release stating " Garments are considered sacred by Church members and are not regarded as a topic for casual conversation."

Even though I don't think a lot of the religious doctrines and practices make sense, in most religions actually, I feel a bit bad for people in more "out" groups like Mormonism and Scientology whose faith ends up becoming the main plot point of hundreds of jokes across the internet. I think all of the atheists, agnostics, seculars, and those who practice more "conventional religions" who make jokes about people in more obscure or seemingly "silly" faiths need to learn a little respect and empathy. I remember growing up an evangelical christian and some of the jokes and comments more secular friends made really were hurtful at the time.

So if you are interested in reading more about the spiritual and religious significance of the underwear/"garments" in Mormon faith, one can read about it here: http://www.mormon-underwear.com/

Apparently wearing such underwear is a sign of the commitment and covenant you have made with God. I'm still not sure I really understand very well...I kind of wish the website included some instances of scripture references or perhaps letters or statements from church founders.

The Lilith Midrash -- A.K.A., "We are equals so don't get on top of me, dude"=killer of babies"

I found this midrash in several different sources, including Professor Judith Baskin's book, Midrashic Women: Formations of the Feminine in Rabbinic Literature. I am currently writing a paper on a short essay by Judith Plaskow, and am planning on using her book The Coming of Lilith: Essays on Feminism, Judaism, and Sexual Ethics for my final "Women and Religion" class assignment...though the David M. Carr book I am currently reading frequently cites Plaskow's book Standing Again at Sinai: Judaism from a Feminist Perspective in his interpretations of Genesis Chapters 1, 2,3, as well as Hosea, Isaiah, and Song of Songs. So I guess I will have to read that Plaskow book as well. Maybe I will read both and then decided which to use for my final project.

depictions of Lilith throughout the last 2000 years, in art, plays, novels, poems, myth etc: http://www.geocities.com/Wellesley/Garden/4240/apndx.html

my feelings and interpretations of the story TBD....

Anyway, the famous story of Lilith, approximate 800 AD:

Alphabet of Ben Sira 78: Lilith
When God created the first man Adam alone, God said, “It is not good for man to be
alone.” [So] God created a woman for him, from the earth like him, and called her Lilith. They
[Adam and Lilith] promptly began to argue with each other: She said, “I will not lie below,” and he
said, “I will not lie below, but above, since you are fit for being below and I for being above.” She
said to him, “The two of us are equal, since we are both from the earth.” And they would not
listen to each other. Since Lilith saw [how it was], she uttered God’s ineffable name and flew
away into the air. Adam stood in prayer before his Maker and said, “Master of the Universe, the
woman you gave me fled from me!”
The Holy Blessed one immediately dispatched the three angels Sanoy, Sansenoy, and
Samangelof after her, to bring her back. God said, “If she wants to return, well and good. And if
not, she must accept that a hundred of her children will die every day.” The angels pursued her
and overtook her in the sea, in raging waters, (the same waters in which the Egyptians would one
day drown), and told her God’s orders. And yet she did not want to return. They told her they
would drown her in the sea, and she replied. “Leave me alone! I was only created in order to
sicken babies: if they are boys, from birth to day eight I will have power over them; if they are
girls, from birth to day twenty.” When they heard her reply, they pleaded with her to come back.
She swore to them in the name of the living God that whenever she would see them or their
names or their images on an amulet, she would not overpower that baby, and she accepted that
a hundred of her children would die every day. Therefore, a hundred of the demons die every
day, and therefore, we write the names [of the three angels] on amulets of young children. When
Lilith sees them, she remembers her oath and the child is [protected and] healed.

the "hipster" move...


that is most of it but it is missing part of the best part:



paging Joanna Newsom...

I thought our story was epic, you know. You and me. Spanning years and continents. Lives ruined and blood shed. Epic.

had a lovely ash wednesday, spending a few hours in fort tryon park with my favorite band, shooting photos... will have to post some of them soon.

sad I missed Leonard Cohen at the Beacon Theater this month, but it was just too expensive for my budget

my goal is to post on this blog more often, apologies for being so inconsistant.

I've been splitting my time fairly evenly between Kensington, Brooklyn and Washington Heights.
I love both of them for different reasons.

oh and I'm hoping to stop by 109 Montague Street to see if there are any interesting free books in the dumpsters, but not sure I will have time...http://gothamist.com/2009/02/26/books.php (free books in brooklyn)