In this episode, Sanju talks with Luke about Buddhist path, and on the nature of reality. The conversation is completely spontaneous – it’s like one of the conversation we have at DRBU courtyard during lunch. Luke shares about discovery at DRBU, which he summarizes in a sentence as : Objective is not Objective. To find out, listen:
Transcript
This is the DRBU podcast, I’m Sanju.
In this podcast, we talk to students and faculty of Dharma Realm Buddhist university about topics such as human experiences, meaning, lifestyle, and philosophy. For this third episode I had a conversation with Luke. Luke is a graduate from the Master’s program at DRBU. He also holds a PhD in mathematics from Rice University. He is a passionate explorer of both the intellectual and the spiritual domain, and I’ve enjoyed and learned from every conversation I’ve had with him. So, happily, I share with you our recent conversation
Sanju: Luke (laughs), you give this name to yourself, right?
Luke: Yes, after Star Wars. Skywalker. My dad was a Star Wars fan, so ever since I was in elementary school, I got that film. And I wanted to do math since fifth grade.
Sanju: Yeah. Was there a time in your life during any period when you felt like you experienced some form of suffering that led you to a realization that maybe there’s something else that’s needed in life, something that gives life meaning beyond the mundane day-to-day?
Luke: From what I heard a lot of people went into practice like that. And I would say, no. My dad has always been Buddhist. Since I was very little, when I walked with him, he would tell me things like, walk with mindfulness. So he would say things like that, like, huh, dad? This is too hard. But a lot of seeds are planted at that time. Or before I ate meat, I needed to recite this mantra seven times. So I actually did that.
Sanju: Was there any time that you felt like you questioned your faith?
Luke: Oh, that was much later.
Sanju: When you came to college, or –
Luke: No, no, no, when I went to college, that was when I started. It was like a honeymoon period. Honeymoon, in the sense that the relationship with religious authority was like, very receptive. It’s like, oh, yeah, this makes sense, and let me do it. It’s like, take all of that in, almost without question. It sounds reasonable, so I was like, okay, yeah, let’s do it. That’s how a lot of people got into practice.
Sanju: You’ve done a PhD in mathematics. So much of mathematics is about logical structures. Was your logical mind ever like an obstacle in that faith?
Luke: No, not – no. I would say it was never really an obstacle for me. I don’t think the logical mind can be applied. In a lot of ways, what most people are trying to do, like they try to prove or disprove the existence of God. I was like, huh, no, don’t do that. That’s not what the logic movement is meant to do. So in those areas, I almost never used that mind, so it was not an obstacle. And later, when I began to question it was mostly about whether the systems that I was taught really worked. It’s not that it’s not logical, but whether it works. Because how I was always taught is like in the sutras, right – oh, why do we want to practice? Because we want to end suffering, and birth and death. But then, later, I just realized, wow, like, this didn’t really connect with me. I didn’t go into practice because I was suffering. That statement has always been hard for me, because I didn’t go to practice because I’m suffering and actually, I just couldn’t relate very well. Like why everything is suffering. And I feel oh, yeah, everything is pretty good. Yeah. Not everything. Of course, there are afflictions. Not to the point that yeah, you know, I feel like there’s so much suffering that I won’t be liberated. No, never got to that point.
Sanju: Why do you think this system works for you? In what sense does it work?
Luke: At some point, like, as I mentioned, I start asking questions. So it means it probably did not at that time, because it was primarily, you know, around the problem of suffering, right? But that problem I just had a hard time with it because I couldn’t relate to it too well. So that aspect has somehow been difficult. And later, actually, a Dharma friend of mine pointed out, she said, ‘Oh, you don’t have enough afflictions yet.’ So I was like, that’s it, yeah, she’s right. So how can I really practice now? I need to find another hermeneutic, another story, that really makes sense to me. Otherwise, how can I be motivated to practice?
Sanju: That’s powerful. In my own practice, I found like, when I’m suffering that actually pushed me to practice more and more, you know,
Luke: Yeah, they were too. When at the moment, when I had afflictions, those come in handy. But then apply those methods, and those afflictions are gone, and I’m happy again –
Sanju: Yeah! What do you do now?
Luke: I’m like, what do I do now.
Sanju: Do you feel bored?
Luke: There was another kind of a motivation that keeps me going. So ever since I started practicing I never gave up the daily practice, not for a day. It was mysterious for me, too. I didn’t know. Later I found out a lot of people were struggling to maintain their practice, and how come I just did it? And, you know, it wasn’t – it wasn’t very obvious at that time, but later, at various moments it gave me insights on what am I attracted to in this practice.
Sanju: Is it curiosity?
Luke: Yes. Wonder, curiosity, interest. Yeah, it kept me going for most of my life. I was motivated by that actually, not by suffering. So, very lucky, very fortunate to be able to live like that so far.
Sanju: How do you describe the wonder you’ve experienced – what’s the wonder like?
Luke: I would say it’s the magical aspect that attracted me the most. Like, an example, right: Master Hua in his commentary talks about the moon. It says oh, actually on the moon they’re like celestial palaces and devas and arhats speaking Dharma and all these. I was like, how, this looks really interesting. Well, what about modern sciences? It says that the moon is a lifeless rock and there’s no atmosphere, no this and no that. I’m like oh, that’s not very interesting. Hmm. Now, I have a respect for both. I came from the scientific background as like, educated. I know how it works. But I also have a lot of faith in you know, like the Dharma, in Master Hua’s wisdom. So I was wondering Hmm, how do they – how do they really live together? How does it work? So in other situations like oh, when Master Hua was talking about different kinds of worlds and planets, revolving around each other, and he said, oh, you know, it’s due to the Bodhisattva vows and living being’s karma and bodhisattvas’s spiritual powers that keep these in place. It talks about these disks of wind that keeps different worlds in place. And what does science say? Oh, law of gravitation, Newton, and then you write down the equation, and that’s it. It’s like, uhh, where is all the magic in all that? I feel like there is a lot to be to be investigated in mystical descriptions.
Sanju: Interestingly, though, Newton himself wasn’t definitive about it. He opened up that space for thinking about it. It wasn’t like, now I’ve solved it, go do other things. There’s more like, there’s still the magic, the you know, it’s holding things, we don’t know why –
Luke: But his contemporaries didn’t like it.
Sanju: Right, right.
Luke: Yeah. So it’s that kind of question that really kept me going, and really interested in the science that the bodhisattvas and Buddhas investigated. How do they do science? It’s different from how we do it. How do they do this? So that they are able to, you know, open up all that wisdom or that like compassion and all the other spiritual powers – like, magic. Like, how does that work? So I’m really curious about that one. I would say, that’s pretty much the kind of question that kept me motivated and exploring. Yeah. And that’s the kind of mindset that I came with.
Sanju: I want to know more about what precisely was the question again, and then what answers did you find here at DW?
Luke: You can say the motivating question is what is the science that the Buddhas and bodhisattvas investigate? How do they investigate it? How do I understand this and how do I talk to, say, scientists from our age. How do I really communicate this? Especially in the subjective realms. What happens when we meditate? Because, just looking at, you know, if you’re coming from the materialist viewpoint, you look at these people observing their breath, observing their sensations on the body. Like, what? It’s totally incomprehensible, why would you do these things? It’s, you know, you’re doing some exercise in a totally subjective realm. There is no – almost like not doing any objective investigation.
Sanju: So, by science, we’re referring to like, maybe scientific method, where we try to find something objective and measurable. We’re trying to quantify. Would you say that – how would you describe this science, first?
Luke: Yeah, what you just said, it’s probably what a lot of people think of as science, but for me, it’s – I actually don’t know. It’s that curiosity about how things work. It’s like, what is really going on –
Sanju: Does it also involve to be able to explain to someone else how things work?
Luke: Yeah, yeah, I have to get an idea of how things work and be able to use it to achieve certain effects. So I would say these two aspects are what defines this, not the particular methodology.
Sanju: There are some methods that have been laid out by the Buddha, right, as if like he investigated into the nature of mind and body, and then he kind of laid out a certain path. Would you consider that scientific?
Luke: Of course you can extract the science out of that. This is actually what I was trying to do. But the objective of Buddha is different from what we just said, right? It’s to investigate what’s going on and come up with some application of that knowledge. His main focus is the problem of suffering. So I would say he is having a different goal in mind. All the scientific elements are in there, but you just need to somehow take all these elements, string them together in a different way, and tell a different story. So that it now looks different, but all the essential elements are still there, but now it will look different so that it sounds scientific and maybe it sounds more interesting to a person who is not so sensitive to the problem of suffering, or maybe who has a hard time connecting to it.
Sanju: I see. You’re tapping into that sense of wonder in the Buddhist practice. Just to review a little bit. You started your journey not through suffering, but with a sense of wonder. And you came to DRBU you with some questions –
Luke: With the identity of a cultivator – a cultivator scientist?
Sanju: Right, right. And you also said that you’ve found some answers in DRBU. And – I’m curious about that.
Luke:
Yeah, a one sentence summary of what the answer is: objective is not objective. But to unpack, it took me almost like three years. What does that mean? And how do you practice using that. And you know, this word objective reflects on what the kind of mindset that scientists have – [which] is to investigate what is objectively true. When they say objective, they usually mean independent of the mind, no matter what you think. So that’s usually the sense that they use the word ‘objective.’ But then I feel like in this space, there’s so much that can be done to to clarify that – what is objective and why is it not objective. I think the biggest kind of flaw that I see is that in the scientific circle, very few people seem to understand the importance of the scientist – the subject who is doing the science. To them, there is this realm of objective truth. You only have to be trained to be able to intellectualize and carry out experiments that discover this objective truth. And the researcher, the scientist, is out of the picture. Because that part is subjective. It’s out of the picture. What’s important is objective. And this is huge. I mean, this has caused huge, huge impact. Of course, a lot of discoveries have been made from this mindset, but I feel like they’re missing a critical element, the subjective. The scientists themselves – what is their role in the universe, right? I think the assumption – the unsaid assumption – is that they don’t matter. It’s like, consciousness is an accident; It doesn’t matter in the world of objective. You know, we’re so small, the human race only comes in such a short span of the universe and outside of it, the universe is so big, you know, it has nothing to do with consciousness. So I think coming from that background, and you can see oh, yeah, then the scientist is out of the picture. But I would say, that’s the biggest drawback.
Sanju: I still have the very stronghold in my mind of the scientific viewpoint. Most of the measurement works with this assumption that there is something objective.
Luke: Ah, yes.
Sanju: Just the fact that you and I can both agree that a certain thing is a certain kilogram, let’s say two kilograms, right. We both agree, we measure it and we both say that this is two kilograms. And this in some sense is arbitrary. One kilogram is just, we decided it together, saying like this much is going to be one kilogram, and this is twice of that, so this is two kilograms
Luke: So far, you kind of came up with a definition for objective: it’s agreement. So, Okay. Something is objective as far as it can be agreed upon. So yeah, you see, this sense is different from independent of the mind. You see, there’s quite a big gap in between what you just said, and independent of the mind. And that part should not be ignored. Actually, there is a really tremendous, tremendous space to be investigated on where does this mutual agreement come from? But if you jump to the conclusion that it’s independent of the mind, you kill that space.
Sanju: So would you say that what we think is objective is more like a collective subjective, if that’s even a word? It’s like, it’s subjective, but since we all agree on –
Luke: Mmhm. Another dimension is consistency. Let’s say I see this – this microphone right here. I close my eyes, I don’t see it, right. So at this moment, it doesn’t mean anything to me. The next moment, I open my eyes, it’s still there. So in this sense, it kind of makes the mind tend to go into space that it exists independent of us. It’s objectively existing. But in making this conclusion, we have used our mind’s innate tendency for continuity. It exists at this moment, and exists at the next moment, your mind will automatically fill in this gap with a continuing existence. And that’s going to be, that’s something to observe. It’s like, okay, yeah, now we know what our mind is doing. So we can actually distance a little bit from that objectivity for now. And it’s going to be important for later.
That’s one of the things I got from this curriculum. I’m not the first one to ask this question. The first one was actually David Hume, a philosopher that we read that really questioned this kind of thing. He saw the billiard ball hitting and then he saw it moving, and he just questioned, all you physicists say there is momentum in this ball, right? But how do you really know there is this momentum, that it’s able to carry and make things move, until you actually see it hit and then move? So he really brings up this question of, how do you put a kind of momentum in this thing, when you actually don’t actually directly see that momentum – or you can try to stop the ball, I guess. You will feel that push, right. So I guess at that moment, you can say there’s a momentum because you feel that push. But when you’re not pushing it, you’re not trying to stop it, you just see it move. But in your mind, you’re already putting some kind of momentum, you think there’s momentum in it.
Sanju: Right, something extra is being added, right.
Luke: So actually, he says, you know, you’re, you’re doing some things that I don’t know if I can really take. And this spirit is actually very, very important. At that time, I didn’t know, but later I just thought, wow, this is very important, and it really ties in with what we talk about in cultivation, it’s like, it’s very important in cultivation.
Sanju: So Hume is big and cause and effect – that there’s cause and there’s effect, and that cause and effect if we don’t really correlate. We think that they correlate because they seem really continuous. But he’s saying that they’re not continuous. They’re discrete, right? But in my mind, I see one cause, and I see that same effect follows that cause over and over, consistently. So if cause and effect don’t really relate to one another, there can always be a different effect of that same cause. But in my mind, I’m thinking that that causes that particular effect, because I see it consistently, right? That’s the point. What’s – what’s causing that consistency, even?
Luke: Yeah, it’s a good question. What is making it happen?
Sanju: You’re changing – moment to moment, you’re changing, and there’s this discreteness to your personhood. But why don’t you change and become completely different than another point. Why is there continuity, or seeming continuity?
Luke: There is a tendency in our mind to kind of fill in that gap by continuity. And it actually takes tremendous effort to suspend. It will take your whole cultivation to actually temporarily suspend that movement.
Sanju: Right. But again, the question of like, although you’re changing, and I’m also changing, but I’m changing within my own framework, and you’re changing within your own framework – and what makes my framework separate from your framework? That question is still unresolved for me. That’s when like, there seems to be certain laws that are keeping things in check, right?
Luke: I wouldn’t call them laws, you could just say there’s a pattern. It’s like, where does that consistency, kind of like, some kind of un-movingness to it, right? Even though, okay, yeah, the sutra says it’s changing. Okay, okay, but what about – something’s really consistent. Well what is causing that consistency? But a quick answer, yeah? But not that we have arrived yet. But you know, it’s a good one to keep asking. Because we’re very stubborn. It’s the language that’s going on, that we’re using every moment that makes it the way it is.
One example of that is, let’s say, I put my glasses on the floor. And the next moment, I forgot, and I stepped on it. And I saw the whole process, just to see okay, my glasses are on the floor, and I’m stepping on my glasses. I need to have this to go around. So there’s a certain sense of importance already attributed to it, right? So when I’m looking at this glass, I’m no longer just looking at the glass. Because if I step on it, some reactions are going to happen. There’s some kind of anxiety for sure to be happening. Like, wow, I see this. Yeah. So it says, when you’re seeing something, you are never just seeing stuff. There’s so much interpretation in the background that’s going on moment to moment. And guess what, these interpretations are very stubborn. So this can go very deep, not only regarding things that are related to me or mine, but it’s a whole language that you’re always using, an infinite collection of languages that you’re repeating to yourself every moment about what you are, what the world is. And my quick answer to your question is it’s that language, the immutability and the stubbornness of that language is what makes it seem.
Sanju: So then we look at everything then through the lens of interpretation. Constants hold so much importance in terms of mathematics and physics. As long as you’re in this universe and you have a circle, then the ratio of the circumference to the diameter is always going to be this number.
Luke: I think of PI as something different, because that’s purely mathematical. It doesn’t need a world, a universe, for that. So that one, I will say, yeah, it’s a constant to me. But when you say Planck’s constant or the cosmological constant that Einstein came up with, I question the constancy of that one, because, you know, there’s a universe, there are a lot of phenomena. So I don’t know if that’s, that’s a real constant.
Sanju: I see. I see. So you’re separating the mathematical constant from the physical constant. If we are to accept this, consciousness comes first, and then the consciousness chooses the body and the material reality follows that. What kind of way of being follows from that?
Luke: Ah, freedom from the phenomenon. Freedom, Let’s say last week was above 110 degrees. What would that mean for people?
Sanju: Really hot.
Luke: Right. Would that make it very unpleasant? Would that make them restless?
Sanju: Yeah.
Luke: So in that case, you can see there is a power to what’s called the objective, right? So in this case, the objective is the heat. It seems there’s not much we can do about this objective that it’s really hard. But then, like, does it have to have power over us or even is it – furthermore, is it even objective, and where does this objectivity come from? So I think Yogacara would be able to provide answers to these questions. So it was a perfect opportunity for that kind of cultivation. It’s actually: objective is not actually objective, as I always said.
Sanju: Interestingly, it was objective and subjective both, right? It was objective in the sense that we all looked at the temperature and said that it was this much, a certain degree. And we all agreed to that. And then subjectively though, some people were really affected by it. By that same temperature, and some people were not as much affected by it. So the experience of it was pretty subjective.
Luke: Yeah. But the thing is, it can change right? One time can get really restless. But then last week, a cultivation about at that point, is to look at where the subject is subjectively experiencing the objective intersect. They intersect at the point of contact, attention, feeling, and volition. These things, a conceptualization. So these are the things that we can make a lot of change right at. So then a practice is actually classical, you know, Goenka calls the observation of the sensations, so it was a lot of sensations to observe that point.
Sanju: This is S. N. Goenka from Vipassana, right?
Luke: Right, right. So you know, there is this material element called Fire. And then there’s this sensation, yeah? Fire, and then we observe the sensation instead of reacting. So then what happens? You know, if you’re used to it a little bit, then you can feel that the perception changes, right? It’s very unpleasant, you know, restless, and then it changes into uh, it’s okay, you know, I would still call it hot but it’s not that unpleasant anymore. If you can somehow pick up some kind of discipline, and not just react right away, but to observe. So in that sense, I will say your mind gets a little bit of freedom over the material and fire. So in that sense, you know, at that place, is where you change and obtain just that little bit of freedom over the material element, which seems to be overpowering you. But it’s only the beginning.
Sanju: Right, and in changing that response to this material realm, we’re not really seeing that the material realm doesn’t exist, we don’t go that extreme –
Luke: We’re not there yet –
Sanju: And in fact, maybe it doesn’t matter whether the objective is the objective anymore.
Luke: For me, I would like to go further, so it would be an interesting question for me. So actually to see okay, is it possible that, you know, like by my mind, I think this thought, and then I change the weather of Ukiah. Like, okay, would this kind of power be possible? But I think it has to start from what we were just talking about, you know, observing that sensation of heat, and just obtaining that little bit of freedom over the material element fire. So my hypothesis from the new science is that as you do more and more of that, you’re gonna gain more and more freedom from the influence first, but then you are going to gain mastery. Mastery over material elements is somehow you have some level of control, almost. So that’s my hypothesis.
Sanju: So again, the thing is, like, do you have control over your own experience of reality, or you have control over the reality of everything? – That if you think there’s a control over the reality of everything, then you’re also assuming that there’s a reality outside of your experience or reality right?
Luke: Oh my gosh, you’re asking all these perfect questions. How would I be able to talk about this with a person? I’m really glad I have you here. All these questions I have thought about before. So, let me try to summarize my thoughts on this. Let’s say, the gaining of wisdom, the gaining of that little bit of freedom – that changes the language structure of our mind a little bit concerning heat, concerning fire element. So originally there was a lot of language interpreting the fire element, as you know, very hot, very overwhelming, it’s very, you know, blah blah blah blah blah. And then just by observing that we’re clearing that out a little bit a little then first of all, our subjective experience seems to change. And then I would imagine, okay, but are we an island? The thing is, are we an island?
Sanju: Yeah, that’s a big question.
Luke: Yeah, it’s like our language structure, does it really connect to other people’s language structure? And I can’t see it directly. But the very fact that we’re agreeing a lot on the physical properties of the world would seem to say that there’s a lot in common at that level about what we think. The language structure – there’s a whole ocean of shared language. And we’re thrown into it. Actually, by being born on earth as a human, we are thrown into the collective unconscious ocean of languages. About what we are, what the world is, we’re thrown into it, and so we share it with everybody else. But it’s possible to kind of get out of it for a little bit? I believe by practice, yes. The Bible actually talks about this using a different kind of language. They say oh, you know, the Israelites were delivered by God out of their land of slavery. He parted the Red Sea so that they can pass through, right – from the land of slavery. That means to me – what is the sea? The sea is the overpowering influence of language on the entire human race, let’s say. They are constantly interpreting, saying what the world is, you know, there’s a language there. They’re constantly saying what it is.
Sanju: And it’s not necessarily a language that’s always spoken, right?
Luke: Yeah, it’s like way before even lifestyle, it’s a universe-style –
Sanju: And I think that’s another conversation to have, what this interpretation really means.
Luke: Yeah, and that creates everything else. The moment you use those languages, boom, the world is created, your body is created, right. And everybody seems to share it to a certain extent, at least everybody on this earth, right? Because we share it so much, the experience we have about our natural environment seem to be agreed on, to a large extent. And so my hypothesis is, by gaining enough freedom of your mind, you are able to gain a little bit of that, you know, what God does to Moses, right, you’re parting the seas a little bit. So you’re able to kind of like, see what is outside of it. And if your mind gains even more and more skill in doing this, you can actually help others kind of temporarily gain this experience to see oh, what is outside of this sea. So you can actually do that. So that’s my hypothesis
Sanju: Does it mean that there’s something outside of the sea?
Luke: No, it’s something – it’s just that you stop using this language for a while. And then you see oh, what is possible. It’s like, freedom, from…
Sanju: It’s that wonder you were talking about, yeah…
Luke: It’s like freedom from material elements, in this case. Or it doesn’t have to be material. Or it doesn’t have to be material, it has cultural narrative, a lot of that too.
Sanju: Gender narrative, as well. A lot of these.
Luke: All that, all of that is going on. But since we’re talking about science, I’m using material phenomena. Because that one seems to be more stubborn than certain other narratives. The language is more strong. Objective to the extent that we are stubborn about our own language and the collective influence of everybody else, everybody else’s language that is speaking the same thing over and over again. And that seemed to permeate very quickly to everybody else’s mind so that our experience seemed to have a certain common aspect to it.
Sanju: To wrap this up, what we think is objective and we claim to be objective, as long as we’re within the human realm as human beings – what you call ‘objective reality’ is a human reality.
Luke: You can part of the ocean a little bit for yourself.
Sanju: Right. But a lot of that parting happens with the practice, right?
Luke: Yeah, that’s why we’re focusing so much on practice, practice and stillness. You have no choice in standing against this ocean that is coming at you from all sides. I would say the overall objective right now of this new science is not to discover more objective laws, because in the sense that you call it objective, and you call it laws, then people put more belief in it. So that means it’s even solidifying this kind of reality. I would just say pattern. And our goal is to kind of gain more and more freedom from these patterns, both material phenomenon, and mental phenomenon.
Sanju: Right, the psychological.
Luke: Yeah, that the psychological mental phenomenon is what ending suffering is primarily about.