Production

B=Boss, M=Me

B: I need to talk to you about your production.

M: Yea, boss. I knew you'd be proud.

B: Proud. You are as close to being fired as they get.

M: Fired. I've been making ducks like you wouldn't believe.

B: You don't even know what production is.

M: Yea, Boss, it PROvides DUCks to the world, and I have been faithfully doing that.

B: And I have warehouses filled with them. The world is saturated with ducks.

M: But do they have duck smart phones and duck sex toys?

B: When I go on my sales trips, I step out of my car and I see a "closed" sign appear on the door of every store. Right in front of my eyes. The sign goes on and the lights go out.

M: What is it that you want me to make?

B: Anything but ducks.

M: Ok, how about geese?

B: That's a leap.

M: Farther than more ducks.

B: Yea.

Panhandling

I received this email from R in response to some comments I made about those who hang around in parking lots in well-to-do neighborhoods and say they're run out of gas.

Thanks for your thoughtful questions about panhandling. I've wondered the same about our obligations. In general, when one parts with a gift, one should completely part with it (and not nag the recipient about how it's being used). I think we view our gifts to panhandlers differently, more like an investment - we don't personally reap the return, but we expect that the recipient will reap a certain kind of return (food, drink) and not something we deem frivolous (beer, smokes). This is especially true in cases where the money is solicited for a particular need, like gas to get home. If we learn the money's NOT used for gas, we have a right to be upset. If we give in response to a general request (like a guy at a traffic light), I think we have to be even more aware that we can't follow our money. We're trusting the recipient to do what he or she needs with it and to define that need.

What I've decided is to offer food to folks on the street corner, on the theory that without fuel, the brain can't make any other good decisions. I know this is true for me, so I assume it's true for others. Sometimes it gets turned down, which is fine. I appreciate the honesty. And I have tampons for the women.

"Can you spare some change" has morphed into "I live on 40th street and need some money for gas to get home." Yes, I think it is the dishonesty that gets us, though we know, or should know, that the subtext is the same.

I had concerns about the health care bill because it assumes that we know what someone else needs. The same with food stamps. Perhaps someone needs rent money more than health insurance. They might be very healthy, but living on the street. Health insurance might be the modern equivalent of "let them eat cake."

Once, in Chicago, someone asked me for some money for food. It was infront of a fast food restaurant, and I offered to buy him a hamburger. He said, "get loss." Recently I offered a very intelligent but homeless man a loaf of white bread. "No," he said, "I only eat high quality carbs." The Buddha supposedly died of bad pork that someone gave him. Did he know it was bad? Yes, but ate it so as to not insult the giver. Monks beg, supposedly, to give people an opportunity to give.

Doan (Zen Bell Ringer)

H=Her, M=Me

H: So you aren't perfect. Is that a reason to burn yourself in effigy?

M: No, far from it. But it is a reason to reevaluate my career options.

H: So what do you do as doan (Japanese: 堂行) that is so difficult?

M: I time the sitting and then I ring the bells during the zen service.

H: What can be hard about that?

M: Well, there are two bells... a big one and a small one.

H: Is that for big mind and little mind?

M: You're learning, but I doubt it, but kind of because the big bell is for the priest and the little bell is for everyone else. And in a sense you could say that the priest might represent big mind just a little more than someone who is not a priest, though I suspect that any priest worth his robe would deny that.

H: What can be hard about hitting a bell?

M: Only two things. Hitting the bell correctly... and... at the right time.

H: Is that all?

M: No. Hitting the bell the same way, time after time. And hitting it so that it makes music, and hitting it so that you aren't hitting it, but more dancing with it. And not day dreaming.

H: That's five things.

M: And hitting it in the right patterns.

H: How hard can that be?

M: Well, some people learn quickly. Obviously they were reincarnated from ancient bell ringers.

H: And you?

M: I was reincarnated from... I don't know. Something that didn't play the bells. Maybe a monkey or ape. Something that jumped around a lot.

H: Don't put yourself down. We don't want any hari kari.

M: Must be my genes that cause the problem. I could blame my age... but I think I'm learning new stuff as slowly as I ever did.

H: How do you know what bell to ring?

M: There is a schedule. But the chant is in Japanese... and I loose my place as quickly as you can say Jack Rabbit.

H: And when do you hit the small bell?

M: At the beginning and end of zazen, to indicate that the sangha should get ready to bow, to indicate that they should bow, to indicate that the chant is coming to the end, to indicate that it really is coming to the end.

H: And what about the big bell?

M: Oh, that indicates that the chant will soon start, that it will start now, that it started, that the priest has bowed to the mat or to the alter.

H: Is that all?

M: Pretty much!

H: Do you know how... but clutch and do it wrong?

M: All the time... well, almost all the time. But that's perfectly okay... I guess.

Funny Feelings and other Meanderings

It gives me a funny feeling voting a week before the election. Suppose I don't live that long. Would they still count my vote?

I'm in my second comedy class now (almost my third because I'm also "sitting in" on a class.) And I still don't know what makes something funny. But I do love the contrast to Zen, which isn't funny...yet. Maybe one day I'll figure out the humor there. What is funny about "Death comes unexpectedly, How can we bargain with it" (Bodhidharma)? Yikes, saying that is a little funny, especially as we are personifying death... and talking about "it" with a deep raspy voice.

If your dad acted like Archie Bunker you'd leave home as soon as you could. Yet, seeing your dad in Archie Bunker makes you laugh. What gives here? I saw a sketch the other night where a woman was a new clerk in some kind of government office, trying to be conscientious and nice to the public (lots of smiles), while at the same time enduring devastating criticism from the peanut gallery. She flipped back and forth between the two roles, entertaining the audience to the highest degree.

I had a strange thought today. What if I was okay just as I am? Not even perfect, as Buddhism teaches (though needing a little improvement)... but just okay... not needing to change or improve.

Geeze, we imagine that our heros (Robert Frost comes to mind) couldn't be any better that how they were or are. We couldn't imaging Robert Frost wanting to change who he was one iota (whatever "iota' is). But then we have all heard about revered accomplished people who carried around a lot of insecurity. I remember the story of Jane Fonda confessing to Katherine Hepburn how frightened she was on a set (especially on set with Katherine in On Golden Pond. Katherine Hepburn then told Jane how petrified also she was each time she walks onto a set...even that she'd often lose her lunch. So I don't know where this "okay" will take me. It is funny how we normally don't think others are not okay with who they are. They all put up such good fronts. And we love them for just as they are, not for something they might become.

If you buy a penny stock, you like it for what it might become (i.e. Sun, Ford, or Sprint). But the people we know and like are generally just right... for us, but sometimes not for them.

Now back to the voting thing that I'm going to over-think a little more. Not really, but I was thinking about a march for or about something (march for peace). If you have 1000 people, no one staying home makes a difference. And take pollution. It doesn't ruin the countryside if you throw your wrapper out the car window. Yet we don't do it (hopefully) because of the cumulative effect of everyone doing it. I eat something and leave a dish on the sink. It doesn't make the kitchen look like a pigsty. Or we eat one hamburger. Are we then responsible for the cows that create 20% of the world's pollution? And on and on. It is an honest to goodness quagmire... how all these minuscule acts add up to have such powerful consequences.

So what's wrong...

So what's wrong with a benevolent dictator? I'm not advocating such a thing but realize that most governments are a dictatorship, especially if you include families and businesses. And they are all benevolent. Just ask them!

Some argue that I should vote because if I didn't, no one would. Yet that isn't the case, is it? If someone is drowning in shark infested waters I don't need to jump in for the man to be saved. But someone does.

Which brings me back to the credit card dilemma. What is wrong with just paying the minimum? Imagine that the credit card had an unlimited cap and the death tax is 100%.. and one's heirs are not responsible for their debts. Why am I better off paying the minimum rather than the full amount. Yes, die with as much debt as possible. Isn't that what Uncle Sam does? Fortunately or unfortunately all my assumptions are unfounded.

Don't Vote...more questions.

Six people have encouraged me to vote in this election. In Texas, one is allowed to vote early without any explanation. The polling booths have been open for awhile. So, hoping the nudgings would go away, I complied. I feel like a  sucker though, led by the masses to believe that my vote will make a difference, when in reality it probably won't. And I'm especially despondent that I voted for a fix the roads bond issue that was advertised that it would not raise taxes. I told my wife about it and she gave me a gentle sucker look.

One of the persons, my friend Joan, assumed that all her Facebook friends would vote for Democrats. I wonder if she would have encouraged me, knowing that I might not.

One person promised that their favorite candidate wouldn't be the nasty fellow that he was appearing to be in the campaign... and that, when elected, he'd become an advocate for all things good.

A colleague, Buck, and I once had a discussion about voting. I said, "Rich (I didn't call him "Buck" to his face), suppose that there were three candidates, A, B, and C. A was a popular and evil contender. B was not a favorite, but had a chance to keep the evil contender out of office. and C was brilliant, but didn't have a chance. Who would you vote for?

I said that it would be a waste of a vote to choose C. He said one always had the responsibility to vote for whom they believe is the best candidate. I asked if you had a chance to keep Hitler from being elected (supposedly in the first election that he won, he did so with only one vote), would you vote for someone better but not your favorite. He said absolutely no.

So where do we get these rules? I'll do this, but not that. I won't fight a small battle to prevent a bigger battle. I won't get sell a stock because it might go higher. I won't engage in politics because it is corrupt.

What a breath of fresh air it would be if we could just look at new situations for what they are. My friend told me today that when we see something more information goes to our visual cortex from our brain than from the object. We don't really "see," do we? 

Which leads to another question, "how should I vote?" Most people would say that, given a choice of voting for someone who'd benefit the country or benefit themselves (but not both) they'd say that good people should vote for those who'd benefit the country. I'll have to ask Buck if that's what one should do. Imagine if everyone voted for their own benefit. Wouldn't the greater good ultimately be served?

Right Livelihood... Questions.

"Right Livelihood is, first, a way to earn a living without compromising the Precepts. It is a way of making a living that does no harm to others. In the Vanijja Sutta (this is from the Sutra-pitaka of the Tripitaka), the Buddha said, "A lay follower should not engage in five types of business. Which five? Business in weapons, business in human beings, business in meat, business in intoxicants, and business in poison."

Vietnamese Zen teacher Thich Nhat Hanh wrote,
"To practice Right Livelihood (samyag ajiva), you have to find a way to earn your living without transgressing your ideals of love and compassion. The way you support yourself can be an expression of your deepest self, or it can be a source of suffering for you and others. " ... Our vocation can nourish our understanding and compassion, or erode them. We should be awake to the consequences, far and near, of the way we earn our living." (The Heart of the Buddha's Teaching [Parallax Press, 1998], p. 104)

A friend of mine was quite judgmental about option traders, esp. the successful ones. He felt that they didn't really produce anything, so that they were evil.

I didn't agree with him, though I don't remember what argument I conjured up.

There seem to be two issues here. One is about resources. Is the option trader making the best use of his resources for the betterment of all things. Does one really need to do that? Does one only need to do that if they want to be a good person? The second issue is whether or not it is evil to make a living buying and selling for a profit. I knew a man, Lynn (RIP), who used to buy and sell forklifts. He never actually saw the forklifts. He'd buy them, sight unseen, and then sell them to someone, also sight unseen. Seems like forklifts can be judged by their age and hours of use. Was Lynn evil, making a living finding new homes for forklifts?

And suppose that Mother Theresa confessed that her motive in serving the poor was to earn a fine home in Heaven or maybe to earn some merit to be reborn as a buddha, while the owner of a casino ran his business to give joy and excitement to our lives (thus relieving suffering).

So much for suppositions. The Dalai Lama was asked if one should fight a small war to avoid a big war. I like his answer: that one never knows what will come from something else.