Dead Horse

Image taken from Google Image search

Partially because of my own boredom and partially because kicking dead horses is just plain rude, this will likely be just about the last post I make for a while when it comes to sorting out religion from superstition… at least until the next time I employ fire magick and begin questioning things anew.

So… last night, as part of my intentional avoidance of all school responsibilities, I found myself driving around town with my best, visiting our favorite bookstore: Half Price Books. They’re currently having a store-wide 20% off sale, and while I have no business buying more books, I simply can’t resist. I might also note, if I can do so without sounding proud, that my relationship to my best is often in a “teacher” capacity. Of course, for all teachers, the ultimate goal is that the students should themselves become teachers and last night while driving around my best definitely was a teacher. It all began when I asked him to differentiate between religion and superstition. A few times we talked in circles. A few times no sense was to be made. But in the end, using the idea of a fire and the fuel going into it, we almost sufficiently (for me) sorted out the difference between the two.

Interestingly, a big part of the fire equation hinged on hope, devotion, or bhakti. We determined that bhakti would act as the wood, the fuel. It’s essentially the foundation – without hope or devotion behind any action, that action is ultimately a dead thing. The animating force, the starting place, is hope or devotion. Without SOMETHING to ignite, there can be no fire. In that context, I find it interesting that many of the devotional poets from many different cultures have written about their devotion burning, or burning up. Fuel indeed! The fire itself, then, would be the ritual, religion, or superstition – respectively. This means the action itself. “The fire that kindles,” as my best put it. I find this in itself to be poetic. If you sit around a fire, everyone knows something is being burned to make that fire, but the fire itself is where the attention is ultimately afforded. It’s the big, showy exterior of the chemical change happening right then and there. Religion is definitely the fire. The big showy exterior that results when we set fire (action) to our hope.

Ultimately there’s a very very fine line between religion and superstition where ritual is concerned, and through chatting with another dear pal it was kind of determined that religion is superstition + validity. To go back to my best and his wisdom from last night, a big part of the validity is cultural influence, although let me be quick to say that cultural influence isn’t automatically where this so-called validity begins or ends – but it is definitely a significant factor.

So, we go back into human history. In the case of Hinduism, we can easily go back into prehistory – in fact, some of our scriptures mention a time when it was almost too cold for humanity to survive on our planet, aka the last ice age. But I digress. If you go back far enough you will no doubt encounter “religion” which today would amount to little more than superstition. People responsible for these kinds of studies will confirm as much. Our ancestors noticed that when they danced in a circle under very specific stellar arrangements, the rains necessary for good crops invariably came, which in turn ensured the survival of the community. Suddenly, puja and jyotish are born! Add about 7,000 years to that, and add humanity’s increased development in the areas of language and science, and you end up with “official” Sanatana Dharma. Through the eons, throughout the planet we inhabit, as we gained increasing dominance over nature we sought the rhyme and reason behind that dominance. As we gained that knowledge we codified and systemized it, and rightly marveled thereupon.

Why marvel? Because it’s marvelous. Duh. We’re talking about dark-n-wondrous, truly ancient stuff. This same stuff has made all the difference to us as a species. It’s THE evidence that proves our humanity – humanity being an interesting mix of the physical and nonphysical, mostly differentiated from other similar mixes according to our consciousness and awareness. We are the proof that’s in the pudding I mentioned in the last post, and our religions and superstitions are how we document our proof-ness.

Add another 4,000 years, a laptop, and a gay white Hindu in Indianapolis, and you find yourself with the current picture of yours truly and I’m telling you, finally, that it doesn’t really matter. Not really. I mean, if you want effectiveness and about all the pudding you can handle in your life (as I feel I’ve been blessed with), then you surely want to look into human knowledge that has a strong foundation. A system of thought and belief that touches the clouds, but doesn’t have its head there. Look for so-called superstition that has well-documented science behind it. There’s nothing wrong with carrying around a horse shoe, if your intention is pure and focused – indeed, if your intention is pure and focused and carrying a horse shoe seems to bring about the desired effect, then trust that your “fuel and fire” may well constitute real religion.

I’ll close by once again referencing my recent post about superstition and religion. Religiosity is a small part of my life really. Too often people see religion as the end AND the means to that end. That’s a trap. Another trap is to be found in thinking that your religion is inherently better than someone’s superstition, as both involve the same fires and woods. There might be evidence of it, but I’m not sure you’re allowed to actually think yours is better. Not really. Some would find supplication to an elephant-faced stone statue to be ridiculously superstitious. I don’t. Every single time, without fail – and I mean that as literally as I am able – that I have petitioned my conception of God for what I need, and often what I want, it has been given. From where I stand, my personal superstitions are effective in every regard. And this is where they factually transcend being mere superstitions. I’m speaking about the wood and the fire that lead me to, and provide me with, Light that enables me to see and Warmth that enables me to experience – this is Jnana. They equate my religious experience and facilitate my spirituality.

– Jay Shri Ganesha! –

Om Mahaganeshaya Namaha
Om Shanti

Advertisement

स्वस्ति

Taken from Google Image search

Some time ago… in fact just two weeks shy of 10 months ago I spoke with a friend and also with a client about superstition. To speak of, I’m not superstitious. But sometimes I do wonder if I’m not fibbing to myself. You see, I live almost entirely un-superstitiously for 99% of the time. But when I really want something, and even more so when I really need something, I pull out the ritual like a madman. And then, of course, regardless of what happens afterward, I wonder for some time as to whether my ritual had anything at all to do with what did/didn’t happen. (Of course, ritual is simply planned action, and all of everything experienced is the result of SOME kind of prior action. Whether or not we can discern the connection is a different story.) When I consulted a client about this, her opinion was that it wouldn’t matter if it was actually effective or merely superstition, because it provided a structure for your faith, hopefully for your betterment as a person. I’ll tell you a story to help illustrate this.

A year or so ago, I briefly stepped away from most social engagements and distractions and immersed myself in sadhana in a way like I’m not sure I had ever before. Propitiation with a big “P” is an understatement. It was intense. Pujas. Long long jaapa sessions, fasting, dhyan… I may or may not have ejaculated into a fire while intoning 4,500 year old Babylonian chants, it’s hard to say. But I really pulled out all stops. And it worked. The desired result was achieved AND it turned out to be even better than I thought it would be or hoped for. It’s gotta be the Babylonian spells.

At any rate, I did this again a few weeks ago. An opportunity presented. A shift on various levels. Shiva’s Tandava that I REALLY wanted for my life, and indirectly for the life of my best.

My beloved and I work for almost the same company, but really the same company. My company (before I came to it) bought his a while back. He recently moved into a different position, which is something he’d very much hoped for. In the position he’s leaving he was making a very nice income, plus decent bonus, and among other “perks” could work from home (this is a mixed blessing because on one hand you can work nekkid, but on the other hand there’s no such thing as a snow day, which the company is generally fond of). When he applied for and was given the position he’s about to move into, I applied for his current position. Of course, getting his position would mean an increase in pay for me, as well as an increase in my current bonus percentage.

But almost immediately after applying for the transfer, things seemed absolutely stacked against me. They didn’t seem very inclined toward an internal candidate. They wanted someone with far more technical experience than I bring – in fact, they were actually looking for an over-qualified candidate. And about 90,000 people seemed to be interviewing. These and other factors made the whole thing feel rather insurmountable. More than once I would lament to my beloved via the office IM about how hopeless I felt.

Naturally, as mentioned before, I buckled down and did my pujas, my japaa, my dhyan, and my sex spells (just kidding). This time, I even employed the Christian prayers of one dear friend and requested a Hindu on wheels to keep his eyes religiously crossed for me for no less than two weeks.

And once again, the obstacles were obliterated – and then some! I not only beat out all the other internal candidates, but also all external candidates except one (only because they were technically hiring two people). My first interview was dry, to say the least, but the second interview – which was where I would have been skewered – was a blast. As if simply getting the offer wouldn’t be enough to make me smile, the raise I received was far more than anticipated and even more than my beloved got when he was awarded this position and his new position.

As an interesting aside, a number of months ago I applied for a somewhat similar position elsewhere in the company, and the interview was about as close to an actual train wreck as I’ve ever known. For the purpose of this post, I should mention that I refused all “extra” ritual in the weeks leading up to that interview.

Also a number of months ago, my best confessed to me, “you have better karma than most people I know.” Knowing that karma is action, and that ritual is also action, and taking into consideration that nothing “just happens” and that everything is the result of some prior action (as per modern physics), does that mean superstition doesn’t actually exist? Or does our ascribing results to certain, possibly-unrelated actions, constitute superstition simply because we can’t technically trace the cause of something? Is it ok to marvel at stuff like this and possibly risk being sucked into a mental construct of what we must or mustn’t do to get or avoid certain life events? (Not unlike avoiding certain gods because we’re fearful of what Their presence in our life might mean) Or should we take a more atheistic view and only assign effects to discernible causes, negating most – if not all – wonder? I think I know the answers for myself. What are the answers for yourself?

If this is basically all just superstition, I should admit that by this point I’m increasingly inclined toward so-called superstition, at least the one(s) I’ve chosen. If the proof is in the pudding, I’m almost convinced I’m surrounded by bowls of it. And who in my shoes wouldn’t be? If Babylonian chants and fiery sex magic do the trick, then trick the damned thing out! No?

Om Mahaganeshaya Namaha
Om Shanti

That Which Comes After Sweetest

I said in an earlier post that knowing the what or even the how doesn’t suffice for me. For myself, knowledge must be thorough and as all-encompassing as is possble. This is probably because Jnana Yoga is my path, and probably is the very reason Jnana Yoga is my path.

Here’s what I think I’ve shared with you so far…

So very much of our functioning in life centers around egoic identification. Some of this is practical, like using words such as “I” as a simple reference point. Most of this, however, surpasses practicality and is really where we get into trouble. Instead of using personal possessive pronouns as reference points in life, we become forgetful and convince ourselves that our beloved reference points are actual extentions of ourselves and when those reference points are “relocated” or our relationship to them is otherwise adjusted we experience misery – much as when a relationship ends and we crash and burn. Because of this usual occurence, people do more often than not serve as the tentacles of our ego.

Ego is about as close to being any devil as there ever was, and while “people” as they are, are not necessarily ego, our identification with them – something that’s literally impossible to avoid because of how we’re created and raised – is securely based in ego (in the I-thought, and consequently associated with me, my, and mine).

But this isn’t all bad. Obviously, this outlet for our ego is likewise an effective medium for us to experience profound connection and love, and I do believe that others in our lives are very often Love’s manifestion, and on that note it becomes apparent (and rather full-circle) that the Source of love in our life is likewise linked to the pain experienced. That connection, of course, is that the pain experienced is technically an act of sweet grace from the all-pervasive Love. We’re afforded (sometimes) wonderful people in our lives (sometimes not-so-wonderful) to serve as extensions of our ego – to cause ego flares.

Little by little, it’s only through these ego flares that sweet grace-bestowing Shivashakti works on and with us so that little by little we suddenly arrive at a place within that literally transcends ego/anava mala, and we find ourselves in the unfoldment of consciousness, otherwise known as Self-Realization. People are an extension of our egos, as a grace-filled act of God, precisely to facilitate the maturation and intensification of our anava mala/ego – without which liberation for us is at least 1/3 impossible.

So there you have it. Ego in a nutshell of around 3200 words. I’m sorry to have made you read through all of it, but I hope you see what I’m trying to communicate to you, my dear reader. As a thank-you for reading this far, I’d like to share a video below of a song that struck me once while at the gym. The song repeats “I love you” about a billion times. That phrase, as well as the beautiful souls interacting sweetly in the video suits everything I intended to convey in this series: Others are a sweet, sweet, part of our egos.

Om Shri Mahaganeshaya Namaha
Om Shanti

A Game of Ropes and Snakes

Shankara’s view of what it means to be real comes from his predecessor, Gaudapada, and from the Upanishads. No object, no kind of knowledge, can be absolutely real if its existence is only temporary. Absolute reality implies permanent existence. For example, we often have different experiences while dreaming during sleep. Those experiences often contradict the experiences we have while awake. And of course, both our waking and dreaming experiences cease when we’re deep into dreamless sleep. And so every object of knowledge, whether external or internal, is subject to modification and therefore not “real.” Here in the West, we don’t often recognize that thoughts and ideas are also objects of knowledge.

Behind all our experiences lies the Reality. This deep consciousness alone is the only constant feature of all experience. Vedanta sits squarely between realism and idealism. Western realism and idealism are both based on the distinction between mind and matter. For Vedanta, though, mind and matter fall into the same category as objects of knowledge.

According to Shankara, the world-appearance can be likened to an imagined snake which ends up being just a piled/coiled rope. When the truth is known, the snake-appearance vanishes into the reality of the rope. In like manner, the world vanishes into Brahman for the illumined soul. This snake-appearance idea can also be found in the Ashtavakra Gita in a lesson given by sage Ashtavakra: “The universe rises from you like bubbles rising from the sea. Thus know the Atman to be one and enter even thus into (the state of) Dissolution. The universe, being manifested like the snake in the rope, does not exist in your who are pure, even though it is present to the senses; because it is unreal. Thus verily do you enter into (the state of) Dissolution.”

Other systems of Hindu philosophy (Sankhya, Nyaya, etc…) insist that the phenomenal world holds objective reality. Advaita Vedanta disagrees, insisting: there is no ultimate reality to the world of thought and matter. Mind and matter, which are finite objects with relations, are a misreading of Brahman… like confusing a rope to be a snake.

At this point, it should be made clear that according to Shankara there’s a difference between non-real and non-existent. Simply put, the world-appearance “is and is not.” In the state of every-day consciousness (ignorance) it is experienced and it exists as it appears. However, in the state of illumination it is not experienced and ceases to exist. Shankara also distinguishes between private illusions of the individual and the world illusion. He refers to private illusion as pratibhasika (illusory) and the world illusion as vyavaharika (phenomenal). So pratibhasika would apply, for example, to a man’s dreams – which cease to exist during his waking hours. However, the other, vyavaharika, continues through his waking life – until he comes to realization of the Truth through knowledge of Brahman.

This seeming paradox – the world being non-real yet having existence – is a fact. And Shankara calls this fact Maya. Maya has its basis in Brahman, but only applies to the phenomenal world of names and forms. This leads us to a deep philosophical issue: the relationship between the finite and the Infinite; the problem of how the phenomenal world came into being.

“If we believe that the finite has an absolute reality of its own and that it has emerged from the Infinite and is an actual transformation of the Infinite, or if we regard the Infinite as the transcendental first cause of the phenomenal world, then we must admit that the Infinite is infinite no longer. A God who transforms Himself into the visible universe is Himself subject to transformation and change – He cannot be regarded as the absolute reality.”

We surpass this difficulty if we consider the world as Maya. Further, this explanation of the universe is in perfect accord with modern science. Some might point out that the Upanishads state that the universe emerges from, subsists in, and eventually merges back into Brahman. Shankara doesn’t disagree, but explains it differently: The universe is a superimposition upon Brahman.

In this way Brahman remains entirely unchanged. It is not transformed into this universe, but appears to us as this universe, in our ignorance. We superimpose the apparent world onto Brahman just as we sometimes superimpose a snake onto rope.

It should be noted that the idea of superimposition (vivartavada) is inseparably linked to the Theory of Causality. Causal relation exists in the world of multiplicity – which is Maya. Within Maya, the mind cannot function without causal relationships. Here’s the twist: To speak of cause and effect with reference to the Absolute is absurd. To seek to know what caused the world is to transcend the world. To seek to find the cause of Maya is to transcend Maya – and when we do that, Maya vanishes because the effect ceases to exist. How can there be a cause to a non-existent effect? Thus the relation between Brahman and Maya is unknowable by the human intellect.

Coming up: Maya is an unreal fact.

Om Shanti

Dem Bones

About a week ago I thought I had my entire weekend planned out. I was to work all day Saturday. That evening would mean adult beverages and color hard-baked eggs festively. The following day, Sunday, was meant to be spent in Ohio at Ikea with only my beloved as we took our time wandering the immense place and gathered a handful of new display cases for his Masters of the Universe collection and my collection of Ganesha murtis.

Mother nature had other plans, though, and those plans included dumping a bunch of snow. Everywhere I looked and every new person I asked gave me a different answer as to the ETA of said snow storm. Hoping to play things safe rather than sorry, we postponed the egg coloring and moved up the Ikea trip. It was all the same, I suppose. And even better, it meant my best had his first trip to Ikea.

We get to Ohio that night and, with less time than we preferred, we made our rounds and got in line at the check out.

The crowds at Ikea are typically very mixed. I suppose Ikea has something for everyone. I recall noticing an unusually large percentage of Indians. Wearing a bright red t-shirt with nothing but a nice white Om on the front center, and with dharma tattoos visible, I assumed I’d catch some attention while we wandered Ikea’s acreage. But I didn’t really… until we reached the checkout.

Before us in the line were a small Indian man, only slightly older than myself and two female companions. We had been standing behind them for some time (the line was moving VERY slowly) before they actually noticed me. Then, the man turned around and began questioning me.

He asked about my Om shirt. He asked about the Om Purnam ink I have on my left wrist and the abstract Ganesha ink on my right forearm. He kept saying things to me as he questioned me and my response was always either, “I know” or to basically finish his sentences with the point he was assuming I didn’t already know.

I’ve said it before, and I suppose I’ll say it a million more times before this life is extinguished: Not all Hindus have brown/olive skin.

Everything this guy asked me or started to point out I explained I already knew. Eventually, he said something like, “In the fall we have a Ganesha holiday. It’s called Ganesh-”

And I cut him off, “Chaturthi. I KNOW.” I followed that with a very casual, but slightly annoyed, “I’m Hindu, too.”

His response? “No.”

I could feel my face reddening and my eyebrows being drawn toward the third eye. “What?” he asked soon after. As patiently as I could I explained, “I know those things already, sir. I’m also Hindu.” He virtually ignored what I’d just said and began to ask about the leg tattoo I’d referenced during his earlier questioning of me. To this, I turned slightly and exposed my calf where my newest Ganesha ink is located. He nodded (mind you, to the Western eye this nod is more of a bobble), flatly told me I could only have tattoos of gods on my arms, and then simply turned around and said not another word to me.

Me = floored.

Earlier today I messaged an Indian bahin (sister) that I have in Atlanta. She’s very very dear to me and my life has certainly been better since knowing her. In my message I asked her what that bit about my leg tattoo was all about. She explained that he wasn’t necessarily trying to be mean (I’m not sure I’m convinced) and that it IS generally frowned upon to have a god inked onto your leg – because the legs is connected to the foot and the foot is “dirty.” Knowing what I know about Hindu “protocol,” this sounds about right. My bahin wouldn’t lie to me and I know she wouldn’t say something to hurt my feelings.

But now I also know why religion often has a bad name.

For one, I think this points to an interesting …um, allow me to call it a double standard. It’s not really, but for now I’m calling it that. The feet are “dirty” and yet gurupadapuja is a heart-touching ritual that I, and many Hindus, adore. I understand that there’s an immense element of humility involved in padapuja… The feet are so dirty and the only part of my guru’s body I’m even “fit” to touch are his/her feet. I get it – I get it. But I don’t buy it.

For another, all things are connected and interconnected. I’m reminded of that old children’s song, “Dem Bones.” For your enjoyment, you’ll find the lyrics to that song here. Check it out and you’ll see what I’m getting at.

If my unholy foot can cause my calf to be “soiled,” then by extension my thigh, my hip, my waist and my torso are also unclean simply because “dem bones” are all physiologically connected. And virtually every other part of me branches out from there. Using that math and following that logic, it shouldn’t really matter whether Ganesha sits permanently on my arm or my leg (in my case He’s to be found on both!) because not a single square inch of me is fit to bear an image of god.

And forget the Ganesha on my leg. The “Om Purnam” shloka wraps around my left wrist. Traditionally, the left hand is also a no-no. Does that mean that this is also viewed as disrespectful? Please picture me rolling my eyes and tossing my arms up in resignation. That’s just about where I am by this point.

I once read a book titled, “What’s Right with Islam is What’s Right with America.” (Or something like that) It broke apart the essence of Islam, and also the essence of what America represents. In both cases, culture gets in the way. Islam offers great things to the world, but Arab culture has virtually ruined it. The founding principles of America are what has, since its beginning, made it an incredible world power. And today we see the culture of Americans ruining so much – in our homeland AND abroad. I think I apply the concept of that book to my expression of Dharma.

As a practicing white American Hindu I’m freed from many of the ridiculous, detrimental, and selfish aspects of the typical American lifestyle and culture. And as a practicing white American Hindu I’m simultaneously freed from the proportionate ridiculousness of Indian culture.

I’m never usually for “picking and choosing.” Consistency. Dependability. Predictability. Stability. Those are all super valuable words and concepts that all should strive to implement in their lives. But I also think as we move in life it’s necessary at times to pick and choose. True or not, the Buddha is often quoted as having said, “Believe nothing, no matter where you read it, or who said it, no matter if I have said it, unless it agrees with your own reason and your own common sense.”

To think that God would ever feel disrespected by this particular expression of my bhakti definitely does not agree with my reason or common sense. I understand the cultural/religious background involved… but I simply don’t agree with it. And you can bet I told that man in the Ikea checkout line, too.

I told him with my mouth.

Om Shanti

द्वेष

I love playing the Devil’s Advocate. When you google the definition of that term, here’s what you get: 1- A person who expresses a contentious opinion in order to provoke debate or test the strength of the opposing arguments. 2- The popular title of the person appointed by the Roman Catholic Church to challenge a proposed beatification or canonization…

I could easily be either of those things, but usually just #1 applies to me. The intent of this post isn’t necessarily for the purpose of advocating devilishly, so much as just making my own point about something.

Not long ago I received an email that a blog I subscribe to had been updated. Naturally, when I had free time I went there to read the new news. What I read was manifold-ly bothersome. This blog is maintained by someone I know little about, but respect in a way that kind of surprises my own self. Tandava-ji is well-enough read, writes well, and almost always seems balanced in his approach to whatever is appearing on his blog. He does a great job at showcasing other Hindu bloggery and as such has proven to be a great resource for someone like myself. However, a recent post on his blog (click here to see it) has me scratching my noodle.

The post is about an abrasive young smartass who maintains her own blog and apparently is “wrong in so many ways.”

The drama concerning this smartass goes back a ways… to her own blog, actually, and a “shitstorm” (her own words) that she started there. If you visit the link to her place that I provided above you’ll see a little of what I’m talking about. Here’s a basic timeline for your own understanding: Karol posts something inflammatory on her own blog, she later comments on Tandava’s blog (generally in support of what he’s written, I might point out), and then Tandava takes her comment and her blog and makes an additional post to his own blog detailing how “in so many ways” she’s terribly wrong.

And now I’m pissed and sorely disappointed. Although, in all fairness I’m pissed at and disappointed with just about everyone, regarding this. What follows is my meager attempt at detailing how I feel about said suchery.

1) Karol is a grown human and should have known to take a better approach. I understand precisely where she’s coming from because some of my own experience as a non-ethnic Hindu seems to mirror her own. Still, that doesn’t warrant free license to offend as one wants. She should already recognize, as a white Hindu, that eyes are on her from both sides of the fence: ethnic Hindus will be skeptical (thus her frustration) and non-ethnic Hindus will think her every misstep reflects on them directly, or on the blessed Faith of their choosing. Otherwise, she’s simply misguided. The frustrations she’s expressing are unique to no one. As such, no one has any room to hate on her for them, and in fact it would be far more productive and beneficial to all, literally to ALL, if those who are a bit farther on the journey would guide her instead of judge her.

2) The online Hindu community would be better served if Tandava-ji would ignore the things he finds to be so immensely offensive and stick with posting what he appreciates. (I do realize that, in the context of the last sentence, the very nature of this post makes me a hypocrite. I’m okay with that.) For one, that’s why his blog is what it is. I go there because I know I’ll find useful material for my own betterment. And now that’s not as true. His first point seemed two-fold: we should be sympathetic to those who feel their religion/culture is being appropriated and be careful so as not to offend them. Umm… Anyone who feels something has been stolen from them is likely to feel insulted no matter the subsequent usage of what might have been stolen. For one, I don’t think we need to offer sympathy for ethnic Hindus who feel their religion/culture is being appropriated. That’s essentially apologizing for loving what they’ve brought to the table. I’ve never apologized for asking someone for the recipe to a dish after openly adoring his cooking. Sympathy to someone who is offended when outsiders adopt his/her way of life? That’s bullshit.

I agree with Tandava that we shouldn’t necessarily use someone else’s symbols and then insult them. But I don’t think Karol is insulting anyone but herself. She’s showing her ass, for sure, and if she wants to get in someone’s face I’d say she’s succeeded. Otherwise, all her words amount to, regardless of how crass they are, is that she’s a western Hindu and anyone who doesn’t believe her can go to hell. She’s abrasive, and she’s sloppy, but she’s not wrong.

Tandava’s next point dealt with ethnic Hindus who don’t agree that outsides can also become Hindu and how we shouldn’t insult them. Again, I agree that insults are unnecessary and wrong, but again I don’t see Karol’s words as an attack on anything except the ego of those who, for no good or valid reason, refuse to welcome her. It can’t be stated enough that she should have used a different and more responsible approach, but beyond that I’m with her. Maybe it’s because I’m a gay non-ethnic Hindu in religiously-barren old Indiana that I can relate to the effort required by one having to “prove” one’s own validity. I don’t know. Sometimes people say things and use the wrong words. Karol has certainly used the wrong words. I suspect, though, that all she’s saying is, “I don’t care what you think, I am one of you.”

Tandava’s last point really gets me. He first correctly distinguishes that a Hindu can be either cultural or spiritual and that, when it comes to ethnic Hindus, if one doesn’t act very spiritual then they’re assumed to be merely cultural. I don’t know why this can’t apply to everyone. I’ve known a number of ghetto thug idiots who go around representing what many consider the worst of my society, yet they may well be wearing a gold cross around their neck. Are they Christian, or just in a Christian culture? It could be either or both – it doesn’t matter. If culture and religion can be adopted by anyone, and truly they can, then it also doesn’t matter if Karol is a cultural Hindu or a spiritual one. She’s not ethnic, but she’s still Hindu either way. Asking why a westerner would wear Hindu symbols without strong faith is assumptive and stupid. Many people, in many cultures, in many religions – everywhere- do this very thing. The reasons vary widely and include every excuse from shallow fashion preference to sweet, sublime devotion. The only reason I care about, in this context, is why do I wear what I wear and do what I do. I would encourage the same for everyone.

3) Ethnic Hindus and non-ethnic Hindus alike need to step back and take a look at what Hinduism means. Aside from a sad little handful of basic tenets held in common by almost all Hindus, Sanatana Dharma is too big for anyone ever to say, “You gotta be like this or you’re a bad Hindu.” And, in fact, that aspect of the Faith is part of what makes it supreme among man’s religions. Modern Christianity is undergoing an immense struggle currently. It’s flailing as it tries to maintain what it thinks its image is, while grappling with modern issues – a struggle that, according to Depak Chopra, could push it into extinction. A result of the internal conflict within Christianity that I’ve experienced is that whenever one Christian group misbehaves, many of the others are quick to distance themselves saying, “Those people aren’t true Christians.” This is horrible and disgusting. A family that turns on itself will not survive. The sentiment expressed in Tandava’s post and in the comments that followed are dangerously Christian and it almost makes me sick.

This might sound mean and shallow, but something about her physical appearance tells me that, in person, I’d likely be annoyed by her. Although, in all honesty, if we get past the fact that she has boobs and no penis, she and I are likely far more alike than we’re not. She seems to like challenging where people think they stand. I couldn’t begin to speculate her reasons for this, but I know I do the very same for my own reasons. Let me be clear: the path she and I walk, however differently we walk that path, is not easy. Throughout most of humanity, throughout most of human history, people have loved the very chains that bind them. Anyone committed to using their own brief human existence for the cause of shaking folks out of their ignorant slumber should be commended, not ridiculed by others who not only have no room to ridicule, but also have more in common than not.

Ekam sat…, right? Truth is One. It seems like we’re all good with that part. The other half is “vipraha bahudha vadanti” The wise call It variously. Like no other religion in the world, Hinduism alone offers the richest pool of methods, margs, icons and ishtadevatas for the aspirant to draw from. In a faith where it’s acceptable to live a worldly life, to retreat to a mountain cave and let everything fall away, or to wander around nude and covered in ash foregoing all of society’s norms, I promise you -like it or not – one of God’s names is Karol.

Om Shanti

P.S. My apologies for the lengthiness of this post. In all honesty, everything that contributed to it gave me quite a bag of mixed feelings. I did my best to convey those feelings and thoughts in as orderly a manner as I could, while under the influence of cold medicines. My intention wasn’t to attack any one person, but to attack the principles I perceived to be in action and which I perceive to be mostly adharmic in nature. Please, spare us all, and before commenting read the last bit of this for the rule I have about comments.

positivity, with a little P

Being a positive influence in someone’s life doesn’t always mean making them happy.

Most people think that having a positive influence on someone is to make them happy. I suggest that this, as an automatic assumption, is a mistake and can create as much problem as it can create potential benefit. To illustrate this, I’ll detail examples found in the concepts of the guru and of the bodhisattva.

The most obvious example, of these two concepts, is that of the guru. The definition of guru varies from source to source, but usually always comes back to something along the lines of a balancing, guiding, wisdom –a teacher of the highest regard. Truly, the highest and most trustworthy of gurus is that Guru which resides within every conscious organism, but of which the organism is almost never aware. I’ll denote this form with a capital letter. This form of Guru is cosmic and universal and pervades everything, with a “higher concentration” in beings possessing consciousness. Ultimately, the voice of this Guru would be heard loud and clear if the conscious being was less ensnared in Maya and better able to separate awareness from consciousness. However, because this is virtually never the case, a more obvious and mundane manifestation of the Guru is required. This, too, can take a million forms, but for humans specifically, often comes in the form of another human. This form of the Guru has a little “g” and can seem like a mixed bag.

On one hand, the human guru is able to relate knowledge of the Infinite to others in ways that are easily digested by the under-developed mind. On the off-chance that the mind is unable to comprehend, this form of the Guru might sometimes need to resort to more direct and even physical means of conveying the lesson to its recipient. In things I’ve read, this can take many forms including strong words or even a whack on the side of one’s head.

Another instance of someone/thing affecting a positive influence on someone’s life is the instance of the bodhisattva. For anyone unfamiliar with the term, and to keep this short and sweet, a very basic definition of the bodhisattva includes a fully aware (aka karmically/egoically liberated), yet still individualized portion of the Infinite which has vowed to forego eternal bliss in mahasamadhi in the Infinite to instead manifest, life cycle after life cycle, in the physical worlds for the sake of helping others also find liberation.

This sounds very hunky-dory, but truly is an assumption. The truth is, some must learn the hard way and many times there seems to be no choice except to pull the karmic band-aid, hair-by-hair, from the arm it’s stuck to. In this way, a bodhisattva can be like the guru whopping someone on the side of his head, and indeed, many gurus are bodhisattvas.

I’d like to also point out that, whether someone is a guru or bodhisattva or neither, it’s possible to help lead others and have a positive influence. Further, just as with bodhisattvas and gurus, it’s possible that this can be done without necessarily inducing a smile on that person’s face. I feel many times people have the assumption that to be a positive force, you must necessarily be making people smile or love you or at least want to say good things about you. Not true. Those things depend on two factors.

The first is those being helped must be not only aware of that help, but appreciative. This can seem remarkably rare. The second hinges on their level of ego (ahankara). In my opinion, this factor is the most crucial. Someone possessing  a smidge too much ego may well be aware of the benefit being afforded them by the other person, but won’t value it as much on account of their ego having a stronger say than the opportunity they’ve been given.  In this case, the reaction of the one being helped is likely to be one of aggression. They’ll often lash out, use harsh words, and attempt to reject the help-often succeeding for the moment.

I think in these situations, it would be incredibly trying for the guru/bodhisattva. I say this, knowing what I know and having tried helping those I’ve tried to help… and being met with responses like, “You can’t see two feet in front of you!” Um… no, I actually can. I’m no guru and nor am I a bodhisattva, but even what little help/perspective I’m able to offer others often feels like throwing pearls to swine (a concept I don’t even believe in, really). I can only imagine how frustrating it would be for someone who can offer so much more for another’s benefit, only to be scorned or rejected, completely unappreciated.

It continually amazes me that the ignorant are ignorant of their ignorance. I suppose this is par for the course in Kali Yuga. This applies to me as well… I look back on some of my actions or words, and literally cringe at my own behavior from when I was younger. Some people, though, who are decades older than myself exhibit traits and behaviors that are worse than I ever did in my most juvenile stages. I mean, I know we all are learning as we go. I’m not talking about that. But whatever.

I think before I begin rambling more than I already have, I’ll close.

Om Sarve Bhavantu Sukhinah
Sarve Shantu Nir-Aamayaah |
Sarve Bhadraanni Pashyantu
Maa Kashcid-Duhkha-Bhaag-Bhavet |
Om Shaantih Shaantih Shaantih ||

Om, May All become Happy,
May All become free from Illness.
May All see what is Auspicious,
Let no one Suffer.
Om Peace, Peace, Peace.

Gretchen ain’t goin’ nowhere

For the record, I currently work at an outpatient cancer treatment center. We treat cancer patients with chemo and radiation. As well, we’re a hematology clinic so we also see folks who have clotting disorders, HIV, etc… We employ two receptionists. One of these gals has been with us since the ancient days. Her name is Gretchen. Everyone knows her, and as the result of some uncanny gift she possesses, she knows everyone. Literally. Something very annoying happens often and I suspect it’s in part because of Gretch’s talent.

As any employ is likely to do, at times throughout the workday Gretchen will excuse herself from her post and make a visit to the employee restroom. The duration of her absence varies according to Nature’s call, however suffice it to say that within a maximum of fifteen minutes she’s returned.

Invariably, while she’s away someone will walk in and upon noticing her absence will ask about her. This is fine. It’s even dandy. Something else it is? Annoying and, according to more than one opinion around the office, it’s inappropriately forward. Why? Because the questions that come in relation to her lack of visibility are along the lines of, “Does Gretchen still work here?” There’s never a thought in their mind that maybe Gretchen needed to run a message to someone or that she took a single day off or, god forbid, that she needed to use the restroom.

It’s rude enough that folks are nosey in this way (Gretch deserves time away from her desk without the consent of 90 people!), but what bothers me the most is where their minds seem to automatically go. I find this to be indicative of humans, generally speaking. We see only one of two things: What we want to see, or that which we fear seeing. Both “sights” are selfish and irrational and highly indicative of a person’s interior landscape.

Because of one or both of these “sights” we actually end up missing the larger picture.

When a person refuses to see anything except that which he very much wants to see, he develops ridiculous attachment to his desire-which is already based in attachment ( moha ). It’s because of this mode of mental inclination that a number of unfortunate things happen: someone enters a very unhealthy relationship just for being in a relationship, people or groups are willing to sell their souls just to get one little thing that’s within their focus, people contract disease because they have no power over their own physical cravings.

When  a person is unable to see anything except that he fears, he develops ridiculous aversion to what he perceives as a threat of some kind. This, in a round-about way, leads to attachment of another kind: to that which is the opposite of what he fears. At this end of the spectrum basically the same idiocy occurs, just sometimes inverted.

There’s a saying, “Six of one, half-dozen of another,” and this is true here. When patients walk in and don’t see Gretchen where they had come to expect her their fear of her no longer working at the clinic or their attachment to her being where they often see her, one or the other, kicks in. Reason doesn’t seem to play a role in these individuals’ thought processes: Maybe she stepped away for two seconds. Whether your ignorance is founded in fear or fueled by desire it’s still ignorance.

I’d be arrogant if I didn’t admit to my own degree of this behavior. I hope the fact that I’m able to recognize and dissect this to some measure is an indication that I’m at least a little ahead of the game. Compared to so many in my immediate life, my behavior is influenced relatively little by my personal fears or attachments. I will say that I’ve taken deliberate action and made strong, concentrated, and continued effort to progress through this part of my base nature. My prayer is that fewer and fewer people will limit their vision according to their wishes or their fears.

Om Nama Shivaya

Om Tat Sat Om