This morning a line of thought kept creeping in as I meditated. My theme was metta and the discursive mind kept looping itself in circles asking “What is metta anyway? Since it’s impersonal is it always there ready to be tapped into our is it simply an activity directed towards an approximate goal of cultivating goodwill?”
Obviously, there are problems with the both definitions but that’s where I keep finding myself. I suspect that, at its core the Dhamma represents a radical phenomenology that’s ordered toward freedom from suffering rather than in some kind of knowledge of being and acting in the world but, again, things get pretty murky here. Without a clear purpose for the pursuit of knowledge it becomes painfully clear that one quickly loses the thread.
So, why do I want to know? In essence, I’ve rekindled my interest in reiki and have, for some time, wondered if the universal life energy of which they speak is synonymous with metta. Clearly, this being outside of the scope of the Dhamma, there are no clear answers but it’s something that I don’t mind spending a little more time pondering.