In Memory of Old Friends

 When I woke up this morning, you were on my mind. It’s been a long time. I left there long ago, I had to ramble and walk away my blues and move on, through old and new troubles and worries and wounds and pains. Now I’m home, here, far from that place in time. But when I woke up this morning, you were on my mind…

 On the porch with coffee this morning the eternal mountain valley, the trees and mountain ridges and sky, are faded into a quiet sentinel background, mute and unseen. Word has come that a friend from long ago is dying, and will soon leave this life.

I am old now, and great chunks of memory rest deeply dormant in me, unrecalled for so long I think they are lost. Then a message arrives, a moment comes, a certain quality of air and light, a faint ephemeral wisp of breath in the mountain morning air. Memory stirs… and there it is, resurrected, slowly rising in salient bits and particular pieces, history filtered and sifted and reduced to essence. The essence remains, and rises again in memory.

The memories gather slowly, ancient shadows laboring up through the archeological layers of my life as I wait, wondering how much will surface now in memory, how much has left and is gone.

These are the days when death is more visible to me. The older we become, the more often these messages appear; someone we know, or once knew, is preparing to leave or has left this life. We pause, and remember. We consider the fact before us, the third and last fact of this life.

It has come round often in recent days. A ten year old nephew dies suddenly in his sleep; a friend, rejecting a third round of chemo and radiation chooses to live out the rest of her life rather than endure those agonies again; Robin Williams leaves this life. And not so far back, still feeling like it happened yesterday, my brother dies, my uncle dies; and then there is, so very far back in time, still clear and present as the day it happened, the time my father dies and his leaving informs me, for the first time in my life, of this third and final fact of life.

We come here; we live here; we leave here. Each day, all around us, the vast, dynamic, organic continuum of human life is filling with new arrivals, filled with lives living unique legends, and emptying with constant departures.

The poet observes there is a season and time and purpose for all things, and here it is, one of those moments. A friend, now far distant on the earth from that place shared so long ago, is leaving. We stand, solemn and silent, attending the moment with them, honoring the life lived.

It’s said that there is no new thing under the sun, and I believe that. I also believe one of those things which exists as an eternal, unchanging principle in creation is that the individual life of a human being is always a brand new thing, unique and particular, and it is the one thing each of us does better than anyone else ever has, or ever will. It is the one thing which is eternally new under the sun.

We live our life. It’s the rarest thing in the universe, this life we live. It’s a unique gem, exclusive, it can’t be duplicated and never will be. We live in creation, and we call it that because every life is a new creation, the first and last of its kind.

When those we know leave us we feel the loss of their presence in life, and the presence they hold in our particular lives no matter how transient or how long ago. We remember the connections shared, the part of their life which lent itself to our own as we each lived the discreet experience of our individual lives. And that feeling of loss leads us to a deeper contemplation of one thing which all lives share, that constant, ancient thing which has always been present under the sun; the time of leaving life.

The other day I came across a Latin phrase, damnatio memoriae, which translates as “cancelled in memory.” It refers to a historical practice of the Roman Empire. It involved the official condemnation, by the Roman Senate, of the memory of a Roman emperor . It describes the effect sought as all records, monuments, and every evidence of the very existence of the Emperor is utterly destroyed. It is the opposite of apotheosis, which means that a deceased emperor is believed to have ascended to heaven.

The phrase “cancelled in memory” caught my mind. It seemed to be the collective fate of everyone.

I thought first of all the ancient people who lived in what are now the ruins of history, the long forgotten everyday citizens living long forgotten everyday lives in Akkadia and Babylonia, Troy and Pompeii, living in the cliff caves of the Dead Sea, and the cliff dwellings in Mancos Canyon and Mesa Verde.

I though of my brother, dead now for only two years and yet, even so recently gone as that, nevertheless fading in memory. He is still held bright in the hearts of those who loved him. Yet soon they too will leave life, and their memories of him with them, and sooner or later, in a hundred years or perhaps more, a final article of his particular, unique life – maybe an old photograph hung upon a wall with no memory of the particulars and personality of his life – will be taken down, and put away, and lost. And he will become cancelled in memory, as will we all.

It is the same for all of us. And that is how it ought to be. We come here, we live here, we leave here. Our focus and purpose and essential reason for being is embodied in these three things. Acclaim, recognition, fame, achievement – nothing sought in our desire to not leave, to not die, but instead to remain in memory – can overcome this final basic fact of our existence.

We sometimes desire to be remembered as the ancient sage is remembered, or the divine messenger is remembered, or the paragon of thought or science or art is remembered. We desire that the exquisite value of our life, which we sense as being real and true and irreplaceable and unique, would be recognized and remembered. And so desiring, and so fearing the loss of such treasure, we feel the loss of ourselves and the loss of others, and mourn and grieve it when each of us leaves this life.

Yet we grieve for beauty, and grace, and the miraculous thing which each life is. We are put in touch with how precious, how rare, how exquisitely perfect the content of every life is, filled with joys and this deep grief and the countless shades of existence that occur across the infinite spectrum between darkness and light.

And then, after all these thoughts and many more, a simple answer floats lightly up through memory in a simple song from 1965, and I hear this, carrying me beyond my reveries and contemplative reflections: 

“…When I’m feeling sad
I simply remember my favorite things
And then I don’t feel so bad.”

 And I raise my coffee cup to Barbara, and Scott, and Louis and me, and all the others there, and remember my favorite things about those people, places, and times we shared; and I savor the wonderful apotheosis that each and every one of our lives is.

We Five, 1965: “My Favorite Things” (Rodgers and Hammerstein)

We Five, 1965: “You were on My Mind”

Posted in Wandering Thoughts | Leave a comment

Molly Ivins, American Sequoia

Molly Ivins coined the nickname “Shrub” for George W. Bush. She championed freedom, and her strong stands typically supported democratic principles, the underdog, the disenfranchised, the overlooked and the neglected. She despised greed, stupidity, selfishness and ignorance. She spoke often and well in her opposition to the Bush administration’s suspension of habeas corpus for suspected terrorists. Molly left us in January, 2007. I expect God is currently busy answering a couple of questions I’m sure she had.

Molly was a sequoia among shrubs. She towered in grandeur, rooted in the uncompromising hard-core political badlands of Texas. She synthesized the breath of life by applying light to the noxious and ignoble gasses of politicians. Her honesty and clarity and vivacious, uncompromising independence were unavoidable and unforgettable. Her absence in the skyline marks the loss of a national treasure.

Molly was a dervish in a donnybrook, slapping foreheads and inspiring flashes of light in dark places, hollering to the world at large to “Think, dammit!” Who now will come with the spirit of a rollicking God and iron-principled independent warrior to stand tall in the fray, gleefully kickin’ butts and taking names later?

Whoever it is, they will appear in the darkness bearing a torch passed to them by Molly Ivins.

Godspeed, Molly. You raised hell and earned Heaven. Well done.

Posted in Wandering Thoughts | 1 Comment

Robin Williams

On the front porch with coffee this morning, a cloud of birds flying through my mind. The life and death of Robin Williams occupies my thoughts. Inchoate, without sequence or arrangement, reflections – true reflections, wisps in the mirror of my own experience – tumble around in the dark vault:

 …The human brain, the machine of God; the ancient limbic core, the vault of the amygdala, the hippocampus messenger, the sapient and sentient cerebral cortex. The limbic fires which smolder like banked coals in memory, ever-constant in their resurrection when, unbidden by the higher cortex, they flare into consuming flames in the goading moment and we hear the limbic scream…

 A quote from William Gibson:
“What we think of as ‘mind’ is only a sort of jumped-up gland, piggybacking on the reptilian brainstem and the older, mammalian mind, but our culture tricks us into recognizing it as all of consciousness. The mammalian spreads continent-wide beneath it, mute and muscular, attending its ancient agenda.”

…The “divine madness” of artistic genius. The manic, inspired, sensitive, ruthlessly responsive genius of Robin Williams, the laughing clown with sad eyes, the kind person…

 –There are only two types of humor, the kind that is mean and the kind that is wise. The mean kind causes separation, supports specialness, is anger for the self directed outward toward others. The wise kind brings us together, tells us it’s this way for all of us, confusing, baffling, absurd at times and ludicrous at others, but we’re all in it together and sometimes all we can do is laugh, soothe it with endorphins, let it be what it is and take our remedy as we can.

 Limbic messages to the cortical complex are clear: Danger. Do something about it. Explore until you find the solution. Those red-hot priority messages will not moderate, the dopamine will not subside until the prefrontal cortex discovers a place, condition, behavior, awareness, etc. which provides a solution to the signal pain.

 The prefrontal cortex, doing what it does, seeks solutions that moderate the screaming limbic brain. It may learn new modes of perception and rearrange its own definitions of pain. It may shut down its own system, become catatonic, cut off the flow of input to the core brain. Isolation, reduction of input, can become the drug of choice. It  might learn that dopamine blockers – alcohol, nicotine, certain drugs – work well and serve to lessen the limbic scream. Or the production of endorphins can become a drug of choice. It might learn the calming response in prayer, the peace of the meditative center, the conditioned response to assert that beyond the level of cognitive perception all is well and good and pains are just part of the whole thing, no need to get upset. It all seems a less than complete explanation. It serves to tie together observations of the process limited to the science of brain chemistry, yet I question an explanation that includes only a sum of parts, because there is the thing always present which is greater than that sum, more than a mere aggregate of local fragments.

 There is still the unknowable mystery, unexplained, the connection of all, each to each, in creation itself. Jesus connected spiritually, or at least represented the connection in terms of spirituality. Vitruvius and later Leonardo da Vinci found it in the golden ratios; mathematicians see it in nature in the recurrence of specific bases such as the Fibonacci series. Harmony, connectedness – suffusing all of creation and traced again and again in religion and the arts down through human history.

This life holds, inextricably intertwined, the bitter and the sweet. There is a fire in us which both consumes and creates; in the middle of the consuming limbic fire the light of humanity shines out in the glory of its own genius, forged in that fire. Our lives are not about the moment when the fire, flaring out, overcomes us. It is about the moments when we overcome it, and move on, seeking and embracing that unknowable mystery, unexplained, and the connection of all, each to each, in creation itself.

It is what Is. Let it Be.

RIP, Robin Williams. You are my brother. It’s not about how you died, or why. It’s about how you lived. In the middle of the flames, your light shined out to us all. Nanu Nanu, Mork. You lived it.

Phoenix light centered in flames

Posted in Wandering Thoughts | 2 Comments

Thin Blood

Hearts tamed of passion still feel, still love. Yet the blood runs thin there and the throb of the universe is a measured metronomic tick marking time in even steps. Their success is on its way to Byzantium where the passion of poets is enshrined in gilded automata, and Irish nightingales chained to a pedestal set in a page of history, and the pulsing heart of humanity commemorated in tapestries of dead thread hung upon the crumbling walls of the stone cold ages.

I would rather be a thief stealing from poets, stealing across grass green as fire, wild as the fire that first set fire to the stars, stealing fire from jealous gods. I would rather chant and throb in the campfire drums of joy where wine and laughter howl and lovers steal into shadows domed in stars, where the river slips and pools and churns down through rock to the ancient sea beneath the ancient moon.

I would rather children raised themselves and lived with wolves and mated for life and loped and ran down to death in fierce and gentle arcs across the hillside pines; I would rather be where the heart hears pain howling and moves gently to it to be near, where mind does not remove itself to a distance in embarrassment and fear.

These are the days of the gaijin zaibatsu and uneconomical genocide.

I would rather be dry bones cradling dry bones in a cave than a fleshly priest; I would ring the shivering bells and feel Esmeralda dance, and die, rather than kiss the cold golden crucifix.

Posted in The Wandering Doggerel | 3 Comments

The Dalai Lama is Jim Brown

On the porch with coffee early this late July morning the valley is still; even the blue jay who comes to instigate an argument in the cedars gives up for lack of opposition and leaves me in silence. The past days have produced a surfeit of input which churns inchoately within.

Now the impulse forms to connect the bits together, to find the common thread and draw it through, to find the plot of the story there and arrange it until it is orderly and coherent, and arrange it in a sequence of words – nothing more, really, than a personalized totem of gathered bits of feather and bone – which make sense to me.

The first piece concerns a poster circulating widely on the internet featuring a quote attributed to the Dalai Lama. That quote has been on my mind of late. It’s a great quote and very wise and true. It says,

 “When asked what surprised him about humanity the most, the Dalai Lama replied:

 “Man. Because he sacrifices his health in order to make money. Then he sacrifices money to recuperate his health. And then he is so anxious about the future that he does not enjoy the present; the result being that he does not live in the present or the future; he lives as if he is never going to die, and then dies having never really lived.”

I wanted to learn more about the sentiment expressed and so I sought a further context for it. I thought it would be helpful to find the interview or work in which it first appeared. I discovered another side to this quote, a cautionary tale about the validity of info on the internet which reminds us all that it’s up to each of us to examine and question and verify the validity of “facts” we all too often assume are true but prove to be artful misrepresentations of fact.

The actual author behind the sentiment of this quote is a fellow named Jim Brown. Through an odd chain of events his work took form on the net as represented above. When he found out what had happened he graciously allowed that while not thrilled with the circumstances, “If God can use it, then so be it.” Mr. Brown died in 2002. A reminder to us all that there are anonymous (and magnanimous) sages everywhere. Here is the original work:

 I dreamed I had an interview with God.

 “So you would like to interview me?” God asked. “If you have the time”, I said … God Smiled.

“My time is eternity, … what questions do you have in mind for me?”

“What surprises you most about humankind?”

 God answered.

“That they get bored with childhood, they rush to grow up and then long to be children again”

“That they lose their health to make money and then lose their money to restore their health.”

“That by thinking anxiously about the future, that they forget the present, such that they live neither in the present or the future.”

“That they live as if they will never die and die as if they had never lived.”

 God’s hand took mine and we were silent for a while.  And then I asked.

“As a parent, what are some of life’s lessons that you want your children to learn?”

God replied with a smile.

 “To learn they cannot make anyone love them, what they can do is let themselves be loved.”

“To learn that it is not good to compare themselves to other.”

“To learn that a rich person is not the one who has the most, but the one who needs the least.”

“To learn that it only takes a few seconds to open profound wounds in persons we love and it takes many years to heal them.”

“To learn to forgive by practicing forgiveness.”

“To learn that there are persons who love them dearly, but simply do not know how to express or show their feelings.”

“To learn that two people can look at the same thing and see it differently.”

‘To learn that it is not always enough that they be forgiven by others, but that they must forgive themselves.”

“And to learn that I am here … ALWAYS.”

 James J. Lachard (Jim Brown)

This account can be found at Center for Global Leadership.

The next bit circulating in my mind of late is about karma, and the links of the karmic chain which bind us to samsara, the suffering which the world offers to us. It begins with an extension of something I observed another person do. Later I thought, “Wow. That’s something I’ve never seen before. That person just formed a karmic link, tethering themselves to a source of suffering and setting up the whole karmic cycle of getting back what they’ve chained themselves to over and over again…” The thought cut through all the complexity I associate with karma and attachment and personal perspective and self-fulfilling manifestations of belief which contribute to suffering.

 A grandchild, rebuffed in seeking to play with his independent little sister, wails, “You never want to play with me!” And I feel compelled to offer him a way to free him of this superlative prison, to avert him from this hammer-blow at the forge which will help form the karmic link which attaches him to separation and suffering. I say, “Hey, wait a minute. She doesn’t want to play with you now, but she has played with you lots of times, and she’ll play with you lots more times, too, right?” He allows that this is so, but I can see the link has formed. He is separated from her now, and by extension from all, and will suffer for it in the returns from his belief.

 It’s simple. What we believe in is what forms our suffering and/or our happiness. Until we cease to believe in the link, we are chained to suffering by it.

Until we exercise a positive denial of its usefulness and reality; until we regret and repent of our attachment to it; until we rely upon the truth of compassion which is within us and which is the essence of our existence; until we engage in virtuous activity which produces true satisfaction and happiness; and until we resolve to be vigilant in our own ways and means for all these things – we will be chained to the sufferings our own mistaken beliefs keep us fastened to, and which are visited upon us over and over again.

Another piece circulating in mind of late concerns the putative quote (above) which has become attributed to the Dalai Lama. It resonates in me as a sad, reflective feeling when I observe the way many people live their lives. When I behold their ways and means, their lives appear  to be afflicted with, and dominated by, an empty busyness characterized by pursuit, and struggle.

I think this busyness of pursuit and struggle results from attachments to religion, cultural mores, societal ideology, political affiliation and personal, self-centric desires. These things fill the experience of contemporary humanity with self-perpetuating rings upon rings upon rings of busyness.

The karmic link to busyness is the strongest link of our time. It is composed of a multitude of small attachments formed by the current propagandas of complexly evolved institutions of society, culture and religion. We are taught these attachments in our families and our schools, and they are enforced and perpetuated in our social experience.

I sense the eternal way and focus of humanity has been lost somehow, and replaced with a multitude of ways and perspective points which perpetuate busyness and ignore realization of the spirit within all.

Back at the desk after a short adjournment to the porch to gather my thoughts into hopefully better words. On the porch the jay returned, chiding me for a moment, and then flew away, leaving the valley still again and slowly filling with the morning sun.

The chiding brings forth a reflection of me, of what I am doing, a reminder that it would be best to rest rather than chatter and chide, to let myself fill with peace and warmth and light rather than concern myself with this needle and thread I am playing with, with this stringing together of things better left to be as they are. Yet there is an irritating mote here, something accreting around it, and I will see it through.

I can be wrong, and so I have become vigilant about my perspective and whether or not I am being nearsighted when I look at something. The closer we are to what we see, the less is seen. It’s the old choice: when you look at the whole parade, are you seeing it through a knothole or looking at it over the top of the fence?

A recent study about Americans affiliated with the Tea Party determined that certain parts of their belief system, reflected in their politics as a lack of understanding of the circumstances of persons who were not considered “successful,” was due to a mistaken assumption that all people are afforded the same social and economic and educational opportunities and if a person does not succeed in America it is because they are lazy or inadequate or in some other way undeserving of compassionate regard. This mistaken assumption had at its root a myopic view of others, one which assumed that the experience of the beholder was universal.

An abstract of the study is available at http://asr.sagepub.com/content/79/4/630 and the full article can be found in American Sociological Review, August 2014 vol. 79 no. 4 630-652.

The point being that it is best to take a broad view rather than a narrow one, and that the further we move back from a subject the more we see. It is good to always check our perspective point. If we’re too close we only see our own reflection. Further removed, it is more likely we will see more and so be more informed, less subjective, more objective, and less likely to be mistaken in our thoughts. The world is a small place to a myopic mind. The more we allow ourselves to see, the more we do see, the more the universe becomes a larger, infinitely more wonderful experience for us.

I took an online test for Social Intelligence recently. It’s part of a study being done by “Lab in the Wild,” an adjunct of the Intelligent Interactive Systems Group at Harvard. The test is designed to measure how well a person can read emotions of others just by looking at their eyes.

The test proved to be of use to me in helping identify how perceptive I am in this regard, and by extension gave me a basis of comparison to others about how often the conclusions I take from observed information prove to be valid. The result validated my faith in my own observations as being highly accurate while also informing me that I am not perfect, which was actually a more comfortable outcome for me than if I had scored perfectly. I’m comfortable with my lack of perfection and when it is in evidence I take it as a reminder to be on my toes about the judgments and conclusions I take from my personal perspective. On the other hand, the test also indicated to me that I am better off relying on my own impressions of such things than the perceptions of nearly all other observers.

The point here being that I trust my judgments and have faith in my conclusions, and this faith is not a myopic opinion. I’ve ascertained the validity of other perceptive capabilities I possess in the same way and so also have faith in the empathic and empathetic perceptions I have of the internal environments, psyches and spiritual condition of others.

So. Bona fides established, for what they’re worth – which proves to be very little to the myopic mind (which I can do nothing for) – I may finally be approaching the purpose of all this, which seems to be a statement about the emptiness and busyness present in so many human lives today. I think it needs to be said – and heard, where it can be. The credentials I offer are only given at all because they may, for some, provide enough faith in the speaker to allow them to listen to and consider what is spoken.

I take a break and tell my wife, “Boy, honey I am having a grand old time putting into words all the stuff we’ve been talking about the past week or so!” She knows me, of course, and we both know this words thing is ultimately nothing more than an eccentricity of mine, an amusing compulsion, and we smile about it together often. “And,” I continue, “I will either by God finish it or die in the dumping attempt!”

She laughs out loud – it’s always such a great, understanding, sincere, heartfelt thing when she laughs – and now, here I am again, doing what the jay chided me for.

  • It’s summertime and Facebook is rife with busyness. Busyness filling emptiness. On these pages there’s a sort of no-calorie, no-sustenance aura fizzing and popping out of the ubiquitous rum punches and umbrellas and exotic locales as the world rushes about occupying itself with busyness, tweeting and instagraming and otherwise archiving evidence of their brief existence in a better life.

    It’s all there: the boat, the lake, the fish; the cruise ship photographs signifying something was seen, albeit miles away, and not for long because time at the railing is pressed by the imminent seven course glut and floor show to follow; the mad dashes in local jitneys across ancient landscapes and through cultures with thousand-year histories to make a timely arrival upon tasteful cobble-stoned pavements surrounded by purveyors of gelati and espresso and vendors plying fine mesh money nets to seine the pockets of the surging schools of touristas on their annual migration from where they have come, to back where they have come from – and where they are busy in other emptiness-filling ways, painfully acquiring the dispensations which allow them this mindless journey, which is for most a sacramental obligation for vague reasons, a signatory rite of passage which when stamped and validated becomes a diploma of attainment, a t-shirt proudly displayed, a baseball cap signifying membership in the team which plays this game.

    Lenore and I share a joke together about traveling through the world the way most other people do. We say, “We don’t travel.” Because we don’t travel in the world. For over thirty years we’ve taken the road less traveled, the road that travels through life.

    While other people embraced priorities of struggle and work and future gain, we followed our inner lights and walked our road together, gaining the worth of each day as it came and not building up the deficit of experience which accumulates when a person sacrifices their life now for the hope of a life they want to engage in later. As Robert Frost observed, it has made all the difference.

    As a result of our conscious mutual choice to be here, now, living and loving together in every day, loving each other and living each day as it came the best we could, there’s no need for us to make up any deficit, no need to travel in the world seeking something not yet found.

    We’ve traveled. We’ve been there, done that, lived in that place and experienced the things and found the answers together that so many people on this earth delay seeking for so long, and then begin to desperately seek so late in life, and so often can’t find because the habits of the years have built barriers between them and what they seek.

    Often we want to say to these people, “Just stop. And look. And listen. It’s right here, where you are, it’s all around you, it’s in you, it’s in the moment you decide to love and share and be with each other.”

    A wise word doesn’t travel as far as people think, but here it is. You’ll catch what you chase, and it will catch you. If you chase the future, you’ll always be there and miss what is here right now.

    -30-

    Posted in Wandering Thoughts | 4 Comments

    Desiderata

    Some things said well have the misfortune to become overexposed and then considered as cliches because of it. A connotation is assigned to them which conveys contempt. Desiderata does not deserve that. The link to GoodReads.com says it well: “…what it says remains timeless and reserves for its author a niche in that poetical pantheon to which belong those writers who have, at least once, seen an eternal truth clear.”

    I read it over and over and am always filled with its perfection and completeness.

    Desiderata

    Go placidly amid the noise and haste, and remember what peace there may be in silence.
    As far as possible without surrender be on good terms with all persons.
    Speak your truth quietly and clearly; and listen to others, even the dull and ignorant; they too have their story.
    Avoid loud and aggressive persons, they are vexations to the spirit.
    If you compare yourself with others, you may become vain and bitter;
    for always there will be greater and lesser persons than yourself.

    Enjoy your achievements as well as your plans.
    Keep interested in your career, however humble; it is a real possession in the changing fortunes of time.
    Exercise caution in your business affairs; for the world is full of trickery.
    But let this not blind you to what virtue there is; many persons strive for high ideals;
    and everywhere life is full of heroism.

    Be yourself.
    Especially, do not feign affection.
    Neither be critical about love; for in the face of all aridity and disenchantment it is as perennial as the grass.

    Take kindly the counsel of the years, gracefully surrendering the things of youth.
    Nurture strength of spirit to shield you in sudden misfortune. But do not distress yourself with imaginings.
    Many fears are born of fatigue and loneliness. Beyond a wholesome discipline, be gentle with yourself.

    You are a child of the universe, no less than the trees and the stars;
    you have a right to be here.
    And whether or not it is clear to you, no doubt the universe is unfolding as it should.

    Therefore be at peace with God, whatever you conceive Him to be,
    and whatever your labors and aspirations, in the noisy confusion of life keep peace with your soul.
    With all its sham, drudgery and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy.

    © Max Ehrmann 1927

     

    NOTE: Also, contrary to what is stated at GoodReads, the work is not protected by US copyright law and is available in the public realm. In the late 1970’s the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit  determined copyright had been forfeited because the poem had been authorized for publication without a copyright notice in the 1940s – and that the poem is therefore in the public domain.

     

    Posted in Wandering Thoughts | Leave a comment

    The Wrong Words for Things

    wrong words for things

    Posted in Wandering Thoughts | Leave a comment

    For Better and for Worth

    This morning on the porch with coffee I was pleased knowing that any time I have made my wife laugh is worth more to me than all my writing. So I went and told her this, and it pleased her, and she laughed.

    Posted in Wandering Thoughts | Leave a comment

    Tao Te Ching Chapter 57

    Govern the state with correctness.
    Operate the army with surprise tactics.
    Administer the empire by engaging in no activity.
    How do I know that this should be so? Through this:

    The more taboos and prohibitions there are in the world, 
    The poorer the people will be. 
    The more sharp weapons the people have, 
    The more troubled the state will be. 
    The more cunning and skill a man possesses, 
    The more vicious things will appear. 
    The more laws and orders are made prominent, 
    The more thieves and robbers there will be.

    Therefore the sage says: 
    I take no action and the people of themselves are transformed. 
    I love tranquility and the people of themselves become correct. 
    I engage in no activity and the people of themselves become prosperous. 
    I have no desires and the people of themselves become simple.

    Translation by Wing-Tsit Chan (1963)

    Note: The following comments link with and relate (sometimes loosely) to the observations made at Tao Te Ching Chapter 56, at Ralston Creek Review.

    Good stuff, Louis. The quote by Teddy Roosevelt rings especially loud, it is both historically proven and currently prophetic:

    “…the prime factor in their fall was the fact that the parties tended to divide the line that separates wealth from poverty; It made no difference which side was successful; it made no difference whether the republic fell under the rule of oligarchy or under the rule of a mob.”

     Thoreau’s particular quote is speculative and utopian, yet it does point to a good step forward in the administration of government which seems nearly impossible for the governors of a society to take – to be expedient rather than inexpedient:

     “…That government is best which governs not at all;” and when men are prepared for it, that will be the kind of government which they will have. Government is at best but an expedient; but most governments are usually, and all governments are sometimes, inexpedient.

     Thoreau’s observation is grounded in his baseline belief that the conscience of human beings – the “still, small voice within” or the Holy Spirit, if you will – when properly followed will conform the object of that expediency to the true nature of Creation rather than the local and selfish definitions of the ego.

    The selfish ego proves to be the root of governmental inexpediency when the actions there descend to that Machiavellian level of action which pursues results by any means. That way falls even further when those means favor the few at the cost of the many, and Teddy Roosevelt is absolutely accurate in observing that the next step down that path is the dissolution and fall of both government and the governed.

    Politics is often nothing more than an institutionalized illusion based on power and control which attracts egos who operate in that illusion exclusively. An ugly little twist on what true power – powerlessness – and true control – release – is really.

    In our dualistic experience there is always the “real world” to contend with, and our proper response to it is to behold it and then act there with balance, maintaining a firm line of sight upon the Tao as well as the manifestations of ego which seek to cut it off.

    The dualistic dichotomy is our existential predicament and rules are a part of its nature. It has always been the goal of humanity to identify what rules are good, i.e., conform to the essence of our highest nature as creatures endowed and imbued with the essence, the Te virtue, of the Tao.

    The sage acknowledges that social organizations form and are institutionalized in the realm of what we have characterized here as the “real world.” It’s the place where self-will and choice exist, where consciousness of the Tao is subject to a purely dualistic, binary off-on switch, operated by the individual ego, which may or may not even be aware of the existence of the choice to be “on”, to be aware of something other than itself.

    It seems that there are those who know or learn about the usefulness of keeping the connection open, or are naturally inclined to do so without knowing or learning – and there are others who operate exclusively in the realm of the “real world,” where self interest overrules, ignores, or nullifies the broader perspective of Tao-awareness.

    It is not that they are not imbued with Te, it is more about their choice to view existential challenges from the viewpoint of personal need rather than mutual need, and personal expedience rather than mutual expedience. The expedient employed to meet the needs of the self is paramount in that view, and if it is inexpedient and harmful to others, well then that’s just the way it is.

    I recently picked up a copy of the Dalai Lama’s book “Beyond Religion,” subtitled Ethics for a Whole World. The chapter addressing Compassion and the Question of Justice ends with this statement:

    “…I consider compassion to be the core principle upon which an entire ethical approach can be built. It is from a compassionate concern for the welfare of others that all our ethical values and principles arise, including that of justice.”

     A compassionate concern for the welfare of others. There is a long, well thought-out understanding behind this statement with regard to what compassion is, and what justice is, and what religion is – and at the very end of that reasoned knowing there is that statement. It’s a distillation of thought into a single precept which constitutes a pragmatic, go-to criterion which every person engaged in the “real world” can apply, and which every social, legal, governmental, and economic institution can refer to as a higher governing law which local law (as discussed in the commentary on Chapter 50) can be subject to, and ruled by.

    And yet it isn’t an actively embraced consciousness in the “real world,” where egocentric corruptions seem to prevail and the law of the jungle is every person for themselves. How then do we institutionalize the essential virtue, Te, pragmatically in government, law, in institutionalized structures of leadership and rules of conduct?

    And so we come to your observation via Thoreau:

    “…we will finally be able to experience the best government, which does not govern at all, ‘when men are prepared for it.’ It seems that Lao Tzu, Confucius, Chuang Tzu and Plato all recognized that caveat. Until that time…”

     Even the Dalai Lama acknowledges that time is not here. He expresses wishes and hopes, and offers prayers that such a time will come, and he elucidates the principles and choices which will make it so if we embrace them in our conduct and our institutions. Yet he, too, beholds the “real world” and acknowledges its ego-burdened predilection to focus selfishly rather than make the choice to embrace the broader perspective which includes compassionate regard for others as part of the process which helps us determine what actions we take there.

    Action comes with the territory when we are conducting ourselves in the “real world.” Which is not to say that the last four lines of this chapter observing the mind of no-action which loves tranquility without attached desires does not apply there. Many sages address the nature of actions in the world as well as the fulfillments of detachment and inaction.

    So how do we meet the “real world” in “the real world?” (I can’t desist from the quotes because I don’t regard it as “real” in the way I use the word, although I do acknowledge the dimension of consciousness which regards it as “real,” and which I do experience, too. I would characterize it as the local world, or the self-world, existing in the local, self-based order of perception.)

    To look at a particular aspect of action it would be good to consider the following question: How am I to act when my leaders or the laws I am subject to or the social institutions which have been established to regulate the conduct and affairs of all prove to be ignorant, selfish, overbearing, prejudiced, harmful and/or otherwise at odds with the Tao-centric baseline of an ethical construct which the Dalai Lama has defined as being based upon a compassionate concern for the welfare of others?

    One choice is to live outside local law while living within higher law. Most local laws are in accordance with, or at least not injurious to, higher law. When they are not then we could navigate our way through the conflict, flowing around confrontation whenever possible, making a stand when no other option is available – a time which, as the sage observes, inevitably appears sooner or later. When it comes we have noted here before the models of compassionate civil disobedience embodied in Thoreau, Ghandi, Martin Luther King, and others. Their actions give us a template for how to live outside local law while living within higher law and acting compassionately and firmly to resist conditions which have become injurious in the absence of a compassionate concern for the welfare of others.

    It is true that those who know “know” they know, but when it comes to the world wherein we experience existential separations we are confronted not only with unknowing others, but also with the possibility that we are as unknowing as everyone else, and even our own “knowing” is delusional and therefore null. The ego-self can become deluded and believe that its perception is paramount and so fall out of the condition of grace which connects us with the Tao in the first place.

    There is a philosophical and psychological hypothesis built upon the premise that the formation of personal consciousness and its evolution from a primary “knowing” consciousness to a complex dualistic processor is the root of our disconnection from the Tao and constitutes a condition which cannot transcend itself, and as a result we are stuck in the “real world” and constitutionally incapable of transcending it.

    I think it is necessary to be aware of the schism created there, and while some perceive it as a permanent break between the “real world” and the Tao it would be more accurate to describe it as an overlay, a built-up system which can be transcended. The release of self which we have discussed before is they key there. A simple act, yes – but not an easy one. The overlay is powerful, and has created an existential reality which is difficult to release. But we are looking at action in that existential experience. Let’s stay on that topic.

    So what’s the “real answer” for the “real world,” regardless of whether we can transcend it or are stuck here?

    Personal action, conduct and belief rooted in the highest value we are able to perceive: a compassionate concern for the welfare of others.

    It is clear that human institutions in the world today are going off the tracks on an order of magnitude which in some cases has no historical precedent. There are no historical instances which truly reflect the problems we face with regard to global overpopulation and global warming.

    In other cases the historical record is so full of instances of institutional failures that it simply makes no sense to deny that the elements of social collapse are clearly in play today. We are confronted with holy wars, culture wars, economic predators and their resultant desolations of entire populations, an overweening sense of selfish personal entitlement in the social hierarchy, fear-based motivations inculcated into us from an early age by oligarchic corruptions of capitalism which teach us to watch out for number one and not others because there is no compassion in the world, no cooperation, no concern – in short, no love – and much fear.

    We can see all these manifestations and backtrack to the causes, and it doesn’t take much to realize that the root of many of our ills lays in the fact that we have forgotten the basic precept of a successful social order – a compassionate concern for the welfare of others. Its absence or loss is a historical indicator of social collapse and failure. Its presence is a marker in the genesis of highly successful social orders and governments. It is true that the principle of compassion has historically been applied locally for preservation of the group rather than humanity as a whole, but the principle was active and in play when civilizations flourished, and much diminished or had even disappeared when they fell.

    Now the group is no longer a local one and instead has become humanity itself. As the old local political paradigms fall a developing global consciousness that we are all now in the business of survival together may be the seed which finally brings forth the time that has not come forth yet according to Plato, Thoreau, Lao Tzu, Confucius, Chuang Tzu and  the Dalai Lama.

    We are not there yet. And so for now the “real answer” for the “real world” is to act personally, locally and directly, in accordance with the principle of a compassionate concern for the welfare of others as best we can.

    In this context of personal action the observations of the sage in the last four lines of this chapter seem contradictory, yet we need to remember that the sage is balanced and shifts fluidly between viewpoints which behold the Tao and the existential condition.

    It is beyond the ability of words to express simultaneity of viewpoint, and so the sage does as we all do, shifting the dualistic viewpoint until both the Tao and existential being are seen and, hopefully, the message is conveyed that we are not trapped in one place or separated from another, but rather wholly incorporated into a dynamic experience which is both.

    I think that if the Dalai Lama were asked what the difference is between the sage’s observations of inaction and his own advice to embrace compassionate action he would hold both hands out apart and move them up and down as though weighing something, and he would say, “It is all a matter of perspective.” And then, smiling, he would bring both hands together, uniting the “two,” in the traditional form of the namaste’ greeting. And laugh with compassion and understanding.

    Because we are wholly incorporated into a dynamic experience which involves both detached understanding and engaged compassion.

    Posted in Tao Te Ching | 2 Comments

    Tao Te Ching Chapter 50

    As a preamble to the following dive into philosophical ethics occasioned by the commentary on the Tao Te Ching, Chapter 50, at Ralston Creek Review, I’d like to make a few comments about death, and the one in ten who lives a life not focused on death.

    There are a couple of forms of death which come to mind. First and most obvious is the death of the body in the cycle of Creation which seems to have an effect upon the manner in which the nine in ten live their lives. We all know people who are in bondage to their past or future, gripped in the present by the pains of what happened in the past, or enslaved by fears of what might happen in the future.

    A good argument can be made that all forms of desperate seeking through intense effort to transcend or circumvent the natural principles of creation, particularly the fact of bodily death, is rooted in fear – and that all strife is merely the result of a personal perspective which creates a fearful reflection of that inevitable fact.

    And so the second form of death, the ego-based fear of “self” death, comes to mind. The individual, separated self desires to be alive to its own needs. It cannot afford to look honestly at Creation and understand its own humble location there. Granted, each of us is unique in our own way, but we are not, as the ego would have us believe, special in the sense of being apart from, or above, the facts of life and death or indeed any other basic principle of Creation.

    When we fear death of the body or the ego we can not live in the present. We live as slaves to the past and the future. The sage of the Tao Te Ching observes that this is common, and to live here and now, without fear of death, is uncommon.

    Death is not to be feared, either by the body or the ego. A constant watchful eye over the ego is a good thing. It’s good to make sure it does not consider itself precious and special and above others in any manner which results in behavior and actions which are rooted in fear and not in alignment with a life lived with harmony and acceptance of things as they are, really – that is, living a life in the spirit of wu wei.

    Enough said on that subject for now. On to the response to Louis’ comments on TTC Chapter 50 at Ralston Creek Review, regarding law. I’d suggest reading it before reading what follows.

    ————–

    Hello, Louis,

    You’re the expert here, with a lifelong practice of law to draw upon. Plus, I know you are a moral and ethical person of good character, and as such have a refreshing knowledge of the ethical bases of law which I suspect is rare in your profession. So I’ll come at your two questions from my own perspective.

    I would tend to agree with Han Fei Tzu in that rules appear as a condition of existence in the dualistic realm of human perception. The polarity we create with individual mind generates plus and minus, good and evil, right and wrong – all of which are by definition a subset of the Tao.

    The question becomes, then, a matter of identifying the underlying basic first causes upon which the subsets of deontological and consequentialist principles, and indeed all branches of normative ethical philosophies and all other ethical philosophies, are conditioned upon.

    In the Tao there are no distinctions. It is what it is. So the distinctions of law must arise in a place where the things which the law addresses – intent, action, and result – are also present. This is the place where rules enter. In the Tao there is no place for death or laws or any other distinctions of dualistic perception. So to answer your first question it seems to me that the sage, beholding the Tao and aware of the nature of its manifestations in the human mind and experience, has a place within where death and rules do not enter, and simultaneously a place where they do.

    Which also begins to answer your second question. Is the inherent power in the Tao virtuous? Yes and no. Is the essence of humanity virtue? Yes and no. Is the essence of humanity to be found in the act of being within the context of the laws which give rise to Virtue and Te? It depends on which laws we are talking about, and how virtue is defined.

    Ain’t dualism great? And yet if, being engaged as we are in a dualistic experience, we accept a perspective of simultaneity rather than strive to get personal control of our experience by pursuing rigid answers and insisting that only one side of every “either this or that, but not both” perception is true, then we find a place of peace.

    If we are talking about the basic laws or principles of creation – which is comprised of the One and its essential Te/Virtue which gave rise to the Two and Three and the 10,000 things, and which exists whether or not human perception is present – then I think we’re getting somewhere.

    If we are talking about human perception of those basic laws/principles of creation –  then I think we’re getting somewhere schizoid, because we’re starting at the place where individual identity coexists with universal identity. This is the place where the law enters, and ego enters, and where both gain the ability to go right or wrong as definitions are formed, depending upon what perspective point human perception is standing on, and seeing from.

    The laws of civil and religious society and any other body which regulates or guides belief or behavior does so, hopefully, with an eye upon the “higher law” of Creation, of the One.

    Ego, individual identity, will be self-interested if it chooses to be and will create laws which benefit it in practical ways. Yet separate egos exist, and often their personal desires are in conflict with others.

    Ego too often chooses self delusion when looking at objective Creation from the subjective viewpoint and legalizes its own local perceptions, replacing the higher law with local law. Sometimes there’s enough higher law in there that the light shines through, and you get, for instance, a religion that guides its members to know truth rather than instruct them to know the local perceptions and interpretations of others regarding truth. Sometimes, not so much.

    A body of laws can hold the potential to weigh blindly rather than judge with one eye open and a hand upon one side of the scales. It is to be hoped that the  highest intent of human law is to be in accord with the higher law of Creation when it comes to weigh intent, action and consequences in the realm of the 10,000 things.

    What is higher law, what is true virtue, and when and where does it enter into the human experience? I think it’s the “the root of the root,” and bears looking at here.

    I would imagine that in your experience, Louis, you’ve had to meet more than once those situations in which administration of the law seems not to serve justice – the definition of which is in itself a full day’s chaw – so much as it serves its own principles.

    Laws, through ongoing evolutions which at their very necessary best serve to refine the formulary there can become so superfine that one might wish for certain conclusions of the legal authority to be characterized as particular rather than general, that is to say, unique to an extremely narrow range of conditions. One of the quandaries local law faces over and over again in its constant self-refinement are those instances when local law does not conform to higher law and an adjustment is necessary.

    The issue to determine then is whether local law prevails and is applicable – or whether it is indeed local, and limited, and needs to acknowledge its own limits and refer back to first principles, that is, those which are universally present in Creation.

    I realize that that is basically what the ongoing evolution of law is supposed to do. But one would prefer that rather than over-refine the law into an arcane, complex body of information, and then give precedence to it, there was instead a certain and simple set of first principles given precedence which would always be brought to bear before the arguments of finer points within the law. And of course there is.

    From this viewpoint I would say that certain stated understandings of the individual ego of the higher law could reflect the essence of higher law and so constitute a foundational basis for “local law,” be it a civil or religious or other sort of human-inspired matrix of local definitions which establishes a local code of conduct.

    I would say a local reflection of higher law would go something like this: “We acknowledge that human beings are endowed in their essence by Creation with certain universal conditions present there, among them life, liberty (choice, and freedom to choose to act outside the boundaries of local laws and conditions when they are not in accord with higher law), and the pursuit of happiness (i.e., security, safety, sustenance, harmony, peace.)

    A merely local, egocentric law would be just that: “Don’t eat pork because it will kill you since we don’t know how to attenuate the effects of trichinosis and erysipelas and other hog ills, and if you do we’ll ostracize or stone you.”

    My point here is that if you want higher law to be the source and go-to reference for lower law then it is best to keep both eyes open to the One and remain blind to the local ego.

    Of course then ego asks who among us is able to do so, and answers its own question: “No one.”

    The response of Creation is the opposite: “Every one.”

    And so we come full circle to the place where local law enters, because many choose to ignore what they know in favor of what they desire.

    The concept of a jury, for example, acknowledges Creation’s response that every one of us is able to know the truth and so anyone is able to judge with wisdom and an eye upon truth. Yet at the same time the composition of a jury acknowledges the fact that not all will do so. The best imperfect solution employed to date is a group consensus and the hope that truth will find its way forward out of the conflict therein between ego and higher law, and that in the selection of twelve persons a consensus would arrive which was good and true.

    Indeed it seems there are a number of checks to ego in the law in order to balance the dualistic human nature. A judge oversees the jury and the litigants and their representatives, and may supersede the resultant judgment based on – theoretically, at least – a superior knowledge of the law, its intent, and its applicability to the case at hand. And the judgments of judges are subject to review by a chain of higher courts, all of which constitute an opportunity for the “higher law” to be reflected in the laws of humanity.

    It is a system which in its complexity has created many opportunities for the intent of the law to go off the tracks and has proven demonstrably imperfect many times. Yet it is the result of the best efforts of good and great minds of many generations to create an equitable and just definition of what behaviors are acceptable and which are not in human social interaction.

    Always the dualistic is present. Sophocles observed that when a person takes a position which the law favors then the advocating argument is best based on the letter of the law; but when the law is opposed to the advocate then the best argument is the one which points out the insufficiency of the local law when it is held up to the nature of universal law.  He says the advocate does well to “urge that the principles of equity are permanent and changeless, and that the universal law does not change either, for it is the law of nature, whereas written laws often do change.”

    Aquinas, Montesquieu and Locke also observe that there is a standard of equity and justice present in nature and Creation, the “will of God,” which is a higher law by which local law is to be based upon and subject to. Rousseau and Kant added to the body of those thoughts with regard to the relationship between the individual and government.

    Thomas Hobbes, on the other hand, asserted that civil law is the product of reason, and that reason is the product of nature, and that therefore established civil law is the highest law. He says “nothing the sovereign representative can do to a subject, on what pretence whatsoever, can properly be called injustice, or injury.”

    Hobbes’ argument is a good example for me of an ego-based insistence of supremacy, produced in the confines of local perception in the rational mind, which is perfectly understandable when one considers the limits which are present there.

    Hobbes began at the same point others did, examining the “social contract” which is established between the individual and government and defined by law. Rousseau and Locke looked at the same primary reference point, the social contract, and yet their judgments constituted a powerful counterpoint to certain conclusions arrived at by Hobbes.

    Hobbes’ assertion that an individual more or less automatically gives up their right to act freely when a government exists which is enforcing a social contract is logical and understandable in a local context, but runs counter to the sensibilities of, for example, the American Revolution. Hobbes certainly brooks no room for civil disobedience such as that practiced by Martin Luther King, Thoreau, Ghandi, and the many who have insisted on the reconstitution of local law on the basis that it does not reflect higher law. Those persons chose to be actively disobedient to laws based in a consciousness which they regarded as being in conflict with natural, higher law. In the actions of these persons it is evident that a consciousness of higher law was present in their human conscience, and that thing which we identify as “conscience” is in fact the thing within us which connects us to the Tao, Creation, and the principles of equity and justice present in the very essence of our human experience.

    So I’d say that the unknowable Tao, giving rise to the One and Two and Three, and the 10,000 things of Creation, is the seat of true, higher law. And in the trinity of Creator and Creation and Created Ones there is a bridge connecting all to each, sometimes characterized as The Holy Spirit, or Conscience, or the “still, quiet voice within,” which is the agency through which we can, if we so choose, know higher law and refer to it when we seek answers to baffling questions of legality. It is never enough to be in touch with only the letter of the law. It is necessary to be in touch with the inherent morality which proceeds out of the first cause, and the intent there, and the Virtue there, which is the essence of the Tao and all that flows from it.

    Posted in Tao Te Ching | Leave a comment