Experience the intimacy of things; Do not defile the three treasures

What I like about Robert Frost is that I learn about his life when I read his poems. I know what he did when he wrote "Stopping by Woods on a Snowy Evening."

I have two deadlines: finish taxes by tomorrow at 4:45 pm to go to my new accountant, and finish preparing the attic for insulation by 10 am on Friday. In the meantime, the work on our yard continues, day after day, week after week, month after month. Maybe tomorrow it will be done if no more irrigation values explode. Sometimes I'd make art about all these grand life struggles, but no, I'm still at it trying to live with these Buddhist Precepts.

"Experience the intimacy of things" confused me. Did he really mean "intimacy?" I asked one of my teachers and she said that Buddhists associate intimacy with enlightenment. This actually confused me further, because it didn't seem to fit the second part of precept "do not defile..." Then I found this wonderful article about Buddhist intimacy. I loved this line, "This is true intimacy, handling all beings as if they were ourselves." And, of course, in Buddhism, all beings includes everything.

So while eating dinner (a great dinner expect I wondered if the chickens were well treated who generously gave me their eggs) I read the article (a Buddhist no-no) and then decided I would do the dishes while my wife was watching TV. And I would treat the dishes as if they were my eyeballs (which Dogen said is the way you should treat every grain of rice). Anyway, other than a few gently moves, like quietly setting the frying pan in the sink to wash it, I don't think I passed the test.

I take it that "do not defile the three treasures (buddha, teachings, sangha)" is kind of like "do not use the lord's name in vain." And we do that when we treat things with less than the respect that we'd treat our eyeballs, or, as the Zen teacher Reb Anderson would say, "...as if it is your mother's face."

One more thing. Even though I've now gone through the sixteen precepts, I don't pretend to understand them. The first six I did three at a time. My plan for the next six days is to do one of the first six at a time.  After that, maybe I'll give it all up for lent.

Actualize Harmony; Do not be angry

What is interesting is the apparent duality of harmony. Harmony is between two or more things, isn't it? So this precept make us responsible for harmony. Does it mean we have to fix us to harmonize with the other? And yet, we are one. Does that make harmony impossible?

Saturday the priest talked about how zazen (sitting) was both good for nothing and everything. It sure helps me to keep from being angry. I probably should be angry because we have a situation with a contractor at our house that has been going on too long and beyond budget. But I'm not angry. Maybe a little at myself for various mistakes I made. But we are getting close to this chapter in our life being over... I think. Maybe tomorrow. And then I can work on actualizing harmony.

Give Generously, Do not be Withholding

Open ur heart and ur pockets.

Some give at the office, but not at home. Some give for merit. Some give their money but not their heart. Some can't give, even to themselves. Some can give to others, but not themselves.

What did the ancient monks give? Their bowl would dry up if they didn't teach, so I'm not sure we can call their teaching a gift. And the peasants who'd share their food with the monks did so for teachings. Was that generosity?

Some give because people will think less of them if they don't.

One time, in college, I wanted something to happen, so I took five dollars and put it into a donation box in the church. Then the good thing happened... so I went back and got my five dollars. How many years of damnation will that earn me?

Another time, in Mexico City, I saw a begging woman with a little child. The child, like so many poor kids in Mexico, had an older face but a very small (malnutrition) body. What did the mother do after she accepted a gift from a passerby? She went into the nearby church and gave the money to the offering box.

My parents were very generous with their hearts and time. They would work hard to help people in need. But they weren't very generous giving money away. I suppose I'm pretty much the same.

The part of the precept that is particularly challenging is "do not be withholding." It merges with compassion, doesn't it? How do I open my heart to others?

Realize self and other as one: Do not elevate the self and blame others

This is a tough one. I certainly feel one with everyone when we are getting along... when the seas are smooth. But when I want this and you want that... that makes it tougher. And so I try sometimes to fix you (one way of elevating self) and we separate further. Yes, a tough one.

In my quest for the quick fix, I heard a few days about about "radical honesty" and then read about it again tonight. So I asked my wife if we could be honest, and she said it is not very nurturing and just an excuse to be mean.

The part I don't understand is the assumption of the honesty folks that they know the truth. What they are being honest about is their perceived perceptions, which is many steps away from how things are. The most honest statement to my ears is "I don't know."

Blanton (got his Ph.D from UT in Austin) says that you'll acquire intimacy from the honesty. Buddhists talk of three conditions for skillful communication: right time, truth, and said in the right way. That is not radical honesty. It is carefully crafting what you say in a compassionate (helpful) way.

Once one realizes that we aren't separate, then our words need to change when we try to communicate. For example, "I hate you" implies that I hate myself. If we are interconnected, then, if anything, we'd want to elevate the other... so that we can ride on one another's shoulders.

What would Buddha do?

My sister Gail sent me a WWBD hat as a congradulations for my jukai ceremony.

Which led me to think about WWBD rather than do taxes (I did a little more today) or write about a precept.

According to Wikopedia, WWJD (what would Jesus do) came first from the 1890s, and then reappeared in the 1990s. Now, many are asking, what would Milton Friedman do (or say) about the seemingly "proof" that the free market will not work and that more regulation would have saved the country from the recent collapse.

I'm fascinated how we take heros ((Buddha or Jesus (or Friedman)) and try to anticipate how they'd react to current events. These were all very independent men who went against much that was "assumed and dismissed" in their day. They sacrificed greatly to leave their religion (for Friedman, the economic status quo) and strike out into new territory (for Friedman, it actually was old 19th century territory).

In any case, these were fresh thinkers who took nothing for granted. Buddha told people not to believe him because he said it, but rather they should believe his teaching because they found it to be true.

When I go to the office at the zen center and hear talk about strategic planning, development, multiple levels of membership, etc. I wonder whether the Buddha would have had any part of this. Or did he do all that in his own way?

In college I read  The Meditations of Marcus Aurelius who wrote that we should live each moment as if it represented our whole life (my words after 43 years) and we could be judged by that moment. Perhaps the Buddha lived that life? I think I know one thing that the Buddha would do... like Aurelius, he wouldn't diminish any moment as being trivial. He would treat everything with utmost respect. And he wouldn't honk his horn when the car in front of him was driving a little slow.

Buddhist non-Politics

Kate made some observations about Buddhists being reluctant to be political. Most of the ones I know were pretty gung ho for Obama, but some of the more seasoned ones were more equanimous than that.

I remember the renzai priest a few weeks ago telling me that equanimity + discernment=action. I had mentioned this in an earlier blog. Buddhists don't want to leap to one side of the fence or another. Their goal is not to be right, but rather to save all sentient beings—and they will act when given that opportunity.

I remember a story that my St. Louis teacher told me about his teacher. They were driving on a country road, and came upon a fruit and vegetable outdoor market. His teacher was crazy about peaches so he looked at the peaches that two different guys were selling. It was odd to my teacher that they were similar peaches but priced differently. His teacher (probably as close to a holy man as you'll find in America) bought some peaches from each salesman. They got back in the car and my teacher finally blurted out, "why did you buy the more expensive peaches when you could have bought more of the cheaper ones?" The priest answered, "both have to make a living." Some would say that the higher price salesman were ripping us off, and the lower price salesmen was undercutting the competition (and consequently causing hardship to the farmer). Framing is such an interesting endeavor. To the priest, these salesman were more than his brothers. They were part of the whole as he was.

Tomorrow... back to the precepts... and the taxes.

An Apparition

I should be working on my taxes, but thinking about good and bad is more fun.

I was thinking today more about good and bad, especially since my friend was sending me email questions every few minutes. I started thinking how, before humans were on Earth, there was no good and bad. If such things exist today, they are apparitions, lodged in our head with hate, love, desire, and miscellaneous emotions. Do they exist? Does anything exist? Can you find them in a Neiman Marcus catalog... or even an old Sears catalog?

I asked one of the residents at the zen center what he thought. He said that he likes to use the terms "skillful means" and "unskillful means" because then there is no judgement (his words, not mine) and we can differentiate (my word) by determining if the action led to the reduction of suffering in the world (or not).  He then pointed out that we were all part of the same thing, so our actions are really done onto ourselves.

Is this all just a semantic game? Is there really any difference between the people who follows the ten commandments and those that follow the sixteen precepts?

Being Bad

A friend wrote, “In my mind I can not understand why a person would have to promise to be good in a public ceremony.  A person is either good or isn't.  I can't understand how saying it public would make a difference.  Is it because you are making a promise to yourself, or a promise to the universe, or to the people around you?  Is it making a promise to the Buddah, who is long gone?  Does it give you a leg up on all the people who do not see the need for it?  Does it even matter in the big picture?  Sorry, these are things I do not understand.  The ceremony was quite like the Catholic ceremony, so that is why I am asking.”

My wife and my friend were both confused by the ceremony. I suspect others were confused as well. Was I promising to be good? Granted that it sure sounded like it when I said repeatedly “yes I well!” If not, what was I saying?

Instead of going to the next precept tonight, I thought I'd say something about being “good.” I certainly don't want to be good... especially if it's someone else's concept of good. I think it was one of the reasons I quit the boyscouts... I didn't like the "morally straight" bit. What is the “good” was a question that plagued Socrates.

Am I just publicly saying I'll follow the Buddhist equivalent of the ten commandments? I hope not.

From Wikopedia: “In the Abhisandha Sutta (AN 8.39), the Buddha said that undertaking the precepts is a gift to oneself and others:
... In [undertaking the five precepts], he gives freedom from danger, freedom from animosity, freedom from oppression to limitless numbers of beings. In giving freedom from danger, freedom from animosity, freedom from oppression to limitless numbers of beings, he gains a share in limitless freedom from danger, freedom from animosity, and freedom from oppression. This is the ... gift, the ... great gift — original, long-standing, traditional, ancient, unadulterated, unadulterated from the beginning — that is not open to suspicion, will never be open to suspicion, and is unfaulted by knowledgeable contemplatives & priests. This is the ... reward of merit, reward of skillfulness, nourishment of happiness, celestial, resulting in happiness, leading to heaven, leading to what is desirable, pleasurable, & appealing; to welfare & to happiness.”[7]

So undertaking the precepts saves all sentient beings. We don't do it to be seen as "good" people; rather, we do it because it makes a healthy and happier world with less suffering. And from the Pali Canon, “Abandoning the taking of what is not given, he abstains from taking what is not given.” So you choose to renounce certain behaviors because you become aware of the consequences should you not renounce that behavior. It is not to be a good boyscout. It is because you see what happens when you don't. The boyscout behaves in a certain way because he is told to... or because he promised. Taking the precepts suggests to me that one will look at the consequences of their actions and do only what produces beneficial results. 

See the perfection; Do not speak of others errors and faults

"And why beholdest thou the mote (splinter) that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?" (Matthew 7:3)

(We r not sinners. Hey Bro, we r both Buddhas—right?)

This precept approaches the same issue as Matthew does, but from a different view point.

Imagine this perspective: that both you and your brother are Buddha nature. Neither of you have a beam in your eye. In fact, both of you are as good as they come. And the "errors and faults"—that is the stuff that makes each of us real.

Proceed clearly; Do not cloud the mind

Some interpret this to mean "do not drink intoxicating substances." I think about all the things that cloud my mind. Sometimes it is "getting and spending, we lay waste our powers... little we see in nature that is ours" (Wordsworth). So the problem isn't just drinking, but continually how I divert myself from the moment.

Once we attach ourselves to a position (i.e. Republican or Democrat) we cloud the mind. We argue for or against this or that. We can not see clearly for we have to reject what doesn't support our view and accept what does.

My father said, "you can never move too slowly." Perhaps he was saying something similar. I'm noticing that I have less of a desire to move quickly since I've been sitting. My son was surprised that I could wait for him for hours sitting in a car while he was photographing. I just would stare out the window and watch the light change.

It is hard enough to proceed clearly. Do we need substances that make it even harder?

Manifest truth; do not lie

We went to Mothers for dinner. Ok... first... today was the jukai event. I received my Japanese name: Kenshin Gyozan, which means Sword-of-Truth Looking-at-The-Mountain. It was a beautiful ceremony... and we were given our lineage from the Buddha. It is obviously a lineage of teachers, rather than DNA. Back to the restaurant. My wife asked me if I felt differently and I lied, and evaded the question by telling about one of my teachers who was told that she would feel different... and didn't. What would have been wrong with telling my wife the truth. And I did realize that I wasn't quite telling the truth (as soon as the words came out of my mouth). Maybe it is a male thing... oh... nothing can touch my heart. I don't know.

I realized that I had walked out of the restaurant with their copy of the credit card receipt. I was already miles away when I discovered it, so I called them. They didn't seem to be bothered by my taking the receipt.

Telling the truth. So maybe we don't outwardly lie. But do we tell the truth? Do we do so in a way that is compassionate and helpful? I don't know.

Do not misuse sexuality

The frog in our yard it at the height of his mating. He'll probably keep us up most of the night. Then in the morning I go to sit. After a couple periods of that I go through the jukai ceremony, given that no airplanes (or other catastrophe) hit the zen center.

The third grave precept is "Honor the body; do not misuse sexuality." I heard that a therapist for teenagers says that most of her discussions with teenage girls is about whether or not (feeling a lot of peer pressure) they should have oral sex with boys on the school bus. I suppose, for many, that would be an example of people not honoring their bodies... but who am I to judge?

The real point with this and the other precepts is that they would suggest to us to think more about our actions. Are we consciously respecting ourselves, or are we defiling our body (and/or mind)? That is the question.

Be giving; do not steal

Taking what isn't yours is a little goofy for if we aren't separate, then what is really ours? I'm intrigued to see giving and stealing in the same precept, almost as if these are opposites. Stealing is taking what is not yours, as is receiving. In one case the giver is compliant, in the other she is not.

Maybe giving is like a rush of water. If one is busy giving they won't have time to steal, where the water reverses it course. I don't know.

Affirm Life: Do not kill

I was going to write about the ten grave precepts today... then five... and now I think one will do... especially as it is getting late.

Tonight we had the Bodhisattva Precepts Ceremony, which we do once a month close to the full moon. I liked especially our discussion before the ceremony about karma, confession, and repentance. Usually Buddhists don't use those words... and yet all of us have messed up at one time or another... and we need to learn (from Dogen, the monk who brought Zen from China to Japan) how to "practice" with that sticky karma.

The precept "Do not kill" is different that the Judeo/Christian commandment, "Thou shall not kill." The Buddhist precept is much broader. Some monks wouldn't go out on a path during certain seasons because they didn't want to step on an insect. But not because they'd go to hell, but rather because they care so much for life that they wanted to do everything they could to "affirm" it. And it is based on experience, not prescription. We see what happens when we kill, and we then avoid doing it. But what are we avoiding... that varies widely from person to person.

Every day I get an email "Daily Dharma." Today it was:

My sense is that there is a very real problem among Western Buddhist practitioners. We are attempting to practice meditation and to follow a spiritual path in a disembodied state, and our practice is therefore doomed to failure. The full benefits and fruition of meditation cannot be experienced or enjoyed when we are not grounded in our bodies. The phrase from the early text, when understood fully, implies not only that we are able to touch enlightenment with our bodies, but that we must do so--that in fact there is no other way to touch enlightenment except in and through our bodies.
-Reggie Ray, "Touching Enlightenment" (Spring 2006)

I thought that was terrific. As I sat tonight, I tried to see that it was my body sitting. I (whoever that might be) had put my body on the cushion. Suddenly my mind and its ramblings were not important.

My body is on the cushion, not killing, not harming, not doing evil. It is not trying to be "good" because of the fear of any consquences. It is simply that this is how it wants to be.

The Three Pure Precepts

After the three treasures comes the three pure precepts. To me, the three treasures would be enough because, being awakened (dream on) would lead one to realize 1) that all is one and 2) that hurting something is hurting all (including the hurter).

But for the unawakened, the three pure precepts are:
1. Not creating evil
2. Practicing good
3. Actualizing good for others

Not creating evil: sometimes we are reminded that when we sit we aren't doing harm. Of course, if someone has slipped in the mud and we continue to sit rather than helping them up then we are doing harm by sitting. Not creating evil is difficult as an action. I suppose withholding one's tongue or fist might be an example. This precept seems to be about restraint. Though I suspect as I think about this more I'll figure out some means of uneviling... maybe a little different than practicing good.

(Added the next morning.) I woke up realizing that restraint (or restraining) is a verb. It is similar to renunciation in that one chooses one path rather than another. So practicing restraint is not just not doing... but actually doing. Restraining from not being conscious as I walk across the zendo, I pay attention to the feel and bounce of the floor.

Practicing good: sometimes we justify good action by our intention. Students often want a good grade because they worked so hard. I like the praise "work smart." I'm suspicious when we think we know what someone else needs or wants. I like to think of practicing good as practicing awareness of our actions. For example, when I walk into the zendo unintentionally, the floor squeaks like mad and everyone is disturbed. Even the old floor itself is disturbed, shaken from a deep sleep by an unthinking homosapien. On the other hand, when I walk on the earth "as if it is my mother's face" I reflect an harmonious connection between the two of us. That, to me, is "practicing good."

Actualizing good for others: This is a tough one for me. I don't know what might be good for others. I see modeling as one means toward helping others. Caring is certainly another way. I suppose that encouraging others to do good (whatever that might mean) and providing the means when possible is the most we can do.

16 Precepts: the Three Treasures

Saturday I will be participating in a jukai ceremony, taking the sixteen Bodhisattva precepts. I'm going to write about the precepts each of the next three nights. My teacher asked me what the precepts meant to me the other day and I said it meant to treat things with care. He suggested rather it was "caring," the gerund.

The first three precepts constitute the "Three Treasures" and are also called the "Three Refuges." They are;
I take refuge in the Buddha
I take refuge in the Dharma
I take refuge in the Sangha

It certainly is not refuge in the sense of hiding behind. Rather it is the opposite—coming out. The Buddha, for me, represents the part of us that is our true nature. It is who we truly are when we shed our skin (our ego). It also refers to one who is awake and sees things as they are. It is us when we do that as well.

The Dharma, literally referring to the teachings of the Buddha, figuratively means to me what one sees when they are awake. It is the truth about things (so to speak), though constructed in our minds (and hearts).

I think the order of these is important. The Buddha are our six senses (seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting, touching, mind(ing). It is what we "bring in" with the senses that is our dharma (teachings).

Next is the Sangha, which literally refers to a community of monks, but now refers to those with whom we practice. Figuratively, the Sangha is much broader, for we practice with all things in a shared universe. Nothing is not our Sangha. We take refuge in the Sangha in the sense that we have become cognizant of ourselves as a jewel in a web of interrelated jewels (Indra's Web).

Putting the story aside

My aunt Reggie, a psychotherapist, asked me a similar question, "Putting your story aside, what is really going on?"

We get that when our friend is telling us what a miserable or beautiful day they had, don't we?

So now it is 15+ hours later. Spend the day sitting again... and thought much about Chris's post on Facebook about Gary Becker.

But first, the question (what is this?). I wasn't sitting too long when an answer appeared. "Nothing." After the stories goes, maybe there isn't anything left that is real (not that the stories are real either, but they try harder.)

Then I started to formulate all kinds of replies to Chris, who wrote that the health care bill was legislation as important as social security and medicare. I was in the "this is right and this is wrong" mentality.

I then started thinking about how I could be equanimous in regards to politics. Why not? Wasn't I falling into the same trap as Chris did, taking one side and not seeing that each side really have their points. Sure, social security has saved a lot of lives. And, sure, it probably hasn't given some a very big bang for their buck. The point is that we need to try to see it from all sides.

I had another dokusan with roshi (teacher)... and first told her "the answer" that nothing is left. Then we talked about how to be equanimous and still be able to act. We talked about Gandhi and the Dalai Lama, both very political. She mentioned a formula that seemed to make sense: equanimous + discernment=action. Then she said a few times, "what is it" and rang the bell, indicating our session was over.

She told me about an Indian tribe near Syracuse where she lives. When the elders have a discussion, they put a pumpkin on the table to remind them to see all sides of the situation and they all work to understand the problem from all perspectives... and eventually they come up with a solution. Compare that to our system of nay and aye-sayers!

I didn't know if she asked "what is it" again because it is one of those things that you have to keep asking oneself... or if she wanted me to keep asking the question because I need to work more on the answer. Or both. Maybe I'll find out next year when she returns.

And now my knee hurts from bending it for 27 1/2 hours. I guess I got what I paid for.

What is it?

I survived the day with 15 hours of meditation (and other sundry activities). The best part, besides the incredibly Ōryōki meals cooked by the Austin Zen Center's tenzo, Koji, was spending 5 minutes in dokusan (private meeting) with the the visiting teacher, Shinge Roko Sherry Chayat Roshi. I told her a bunch of stuff, not too unlike what I have been writing about. She was compassionate about the stuff that hurt... but then said, "putting all that aside, what is it?" What a great question to work on for the rest of my life. Perhaps I ought to start a new blog?

I googled the question and found nothing of interest. So back to the drawing board. 


And now, two days later, I remembered that I got the question wrong. It is: what is this?

Better

Today was better. The sun shined, and the dump truck didn't hurt our old pecan tree.

As I walked my daughter's dog tonight, I thought about how she almost lost her hearing because a licensed chiropractor (and also chiropractic teacher) failed to see that she had a bad ear infection. So those who think that licensing of doctors protects patients ought to reconsider their arguments. Certainly one case doesn't prove anything. But we get a false sense of security from licensing. And it creates for doctors a monopoly. See: http://www.fff.org/freedom/0194e.asp to read more articulate arguments for the ending of licensing.

Tomorrow I go and sit facing a wall for 15 hours, less time for breaks, temple cleaning, walking, eating (done from three bowls sitting on a cushion). During this time, no talking and no looking at others. We'll see what kind of picture I do after all that.

Yikes

In the last month or two I've lost the ability to multi-task. Can't do the radio in the car, or the TV when I'm doing stuff on the computer. I read that older people can't multitask as well. Maybe I'm older?

Sometimes when lots is going on I wonder how Obama survives a day. The number of pies that he has his fingers in has to be close to the number of stars in the sky. How does he do it?

So finally people came for the dirt. Just took the ad off Craig's list... and turned down another taker. Tomorrow the gravel arrives. It will be quite an epoch day to go from mud to red paths.

Tonight I go to a play, Picasso at Lapin Agile. I saw it three years ago and wrote a little bit about it.

At my favorite Mexican restaurant this morning I told the owner that they make my favorite food in the world. I said that when I'm on death row I'm going to order it as my last meal. Then we started talking about food in Mexico and I said the ingredients are better there. I was at a farm in Mexico and the grandmother was grinding the corn on a stone on the floor of the barn... and the chickens had just laid some eggs. She said "when was that" and when I told her "1981," she laughed and said "not any more."

It was a good production... but I never like to see the characters of my heros defined by their shortcomings (Picasso/womanizer and Einstein/klutz). These guys are my gods.

Then arrived home with our yard flooding. Yikes! That's what you get for trying to get a sprinkler system fixed. Yikes! Yikes!

My Inlaws, Republicans, and Insurance Profits

My in-laws, whom I love dearly, are Republicans, with a capital "R." I asked my wife's mother if she'd vote for either of my kids, if they were running for President on the Democratic ticket. "I vote Republican," was the answer. She really loves our kids, but is unwavering in her support of the Republican party.

I remember that my dad voted once for the candidate who did not represent the majority in the Senate and House. I asked him why, and he said that he thought less harm would be done if the president was totally ineffective. What would happen if every time we asked for help we got a busy signal? It would be interesting to see what alternative services would arise.

One of yesterday's commenters to this blog mentioned the obscene profits of insurance companies. So I decided that I'd look into it. Here's one blog that indicates that, compared with a number of other industries, their profits aren't that obscene.

Medicare

My friend wrote and asked if I was going to use medicare when I turn 65 (1.2 years). Of course I'll use something that I'm paying for. I'm doubtful if not using it would be a protest of any significance. The real issue for me is this. I don't like someone taking my money and then deciding how it should be spent. Sure I'm grateful that people 65 and older don't have to worry too much about their medical bills... but I'm not happy about the coercive nature of this gift. And I suspect the actual cost, including the fraud, is tremendous.

So the landscaper who was supposed to come after lunch yesterday called and said he'd come tomorrow... and the other landscaper—I called and he said he'd come today after lunch... but then he called and said he'd come at 3:30 PM and now it is 3:44 PM... so much for promises.

A friend gave me a diamond to sell for her. I have two places that will take it on consignment. One says they will sell it for 2/3 of what the other one will sell it for. I'll try the place that will sell it for more rather than less... but we'll see. I did learn that diamonds are not forever... unless it is forever........depreciating.

We had lots of dirt to give away. We put ads on Craig's List, and various neighborhood elists. Someone called an hour ago. They were going to come in 20 minutes. And one of the landscapers did show up... but he wants the dirt later this week. I won't hold my breath.

I've been thinking too about the range of quality of doctors. Some are butchers. Others are able to help people. Is the health care that was just passed good health care? It was announced that 1/3 of births are Caesarian. Most think that is about 18% too many. Is that good health care?

Promises to Keep

Robert Frost wrote, "I have promises to keep and miles to go before I sleep." We waited today for a landscaper who promised to come after lunch, and another landscaper who promised to come after lunch. And we aren't perfect, but we also are readily available by all the communication schemes... so why couldn't they call or write or ?

And my priest friend wrote me long emails objecting to my point of view expressed in my blog yesterday. In Buddhism you hear talk about trying not to have a position, but toward being equanimous. I've hardly met a Buddhist who was able to pull that off. Usually they are like the rest of us, full of opinions.  I suspect any system will work ok if the people are behind it. It is unfortunate that there is such a division now in the house, so to speak. Sometimes that may be the cost of progress.

And in the Scientific American there was an article about a study of many societies to see which ones acted fairly toward strangers. It seemed that the subsistence societies with a local religion didn't treat strangers very well, but that societies with established markets and a world religion did much better. Personally I'm suspicious about every study I read about. I know that someday someone else will do a study to prove the opposite.

Coffee Filters

My wife drinks coffee. I try every couple of years, but I get addicted quickly and start doing nothing but drink coffee. So I drink none. Yesterday she ran out of filters. Someone on the adjoining neighborhood elist wrote that they had half of box of #4 filters to give away.  So I figured, why not? I wrote and she said I could have them. She was happy she didn't have to throw them away. That's Austin for you. So I drove by and got them. She had left them on her porch.

What I didn't ask was whether they were funnel or basket filters. And, as one might expect, since there is no such thing as a free lunch, they were the wrong kind. But Linda will take them to the pottery studio... so they'll be able to live out a long life.

In the meantime, the house will probably have voted on the Health Care bill before I finish the drawing for this posting. I read today an article Milton Friedman wrote a few years ago about a chapter in the novel "The Cancer Ward" where Alexander Solzhenitsyn compares "private medical practice" with "universal, free, public health service" through the words of an elderly physician whose practice predated 1918. Health "care" now has a different meaning when the doctor works for an organization (be it an HMO or an insurance company or Medicare) rather than for the patient. Is this the world we want? As one of my colleagues used to remind us, "careful what you wish for." 

Tibet: Beyond Fear

Last night I vowed never to watch sentient being cruelty again. And then tonight I went to a screening of Michael Perlman's film depicting the plight of the Tibetans who are treated so horribly by the Chinese. The point articulated at the beginning of the Earthlings was that people in power overuse that power. It applied here.

I have great fear that the health care plan being voted on tomorrow is a step toward the nationalization of one of our biggest industries. Yes, there are serious health care problems in the US. But no, nationalization is not the solution. I see the health care bill as a slippery slope to nationalize industries and subsequently eliminate freedoms. And (you may think I'm paranoid) as I watched the Chinese oppression of the Tibetans I wondered whether we are leading ourselves to the same oppression. Silly? Then read on.

After the film, Michael was asked what it was like to return to a free country after being in Tibet. He described how he wanted his friends in 2004 to protest the Republican National Convention in NYC, but that his friends weren't going to participate because they were worried about the police video taping them (which they were doing). Fear shouldn't quiet people down.

Reminds me of Martin Luther King many years ago. He had just moved to town and was asked to join a march. He said no, that he had to look out for his family. A few days later he changed his mind and became the hero that we know and admire.

Earthlings (Don't Watch!)

I told my wife I was going to watch Earthlings, the animal cruelty documentary. She said, fine, but don't tell me anything about it.

Bravely, I turned it on (with my door closed). I watched a minute or so... and then thought maybe I better try later. Now it is later, and I tried again. Trust me that the disconnect between the nicely packaged food in the supermarket and the way animals are treated is such that I can't imagine anyone eating the packaged food if they knew of the way animals are treated... at least as portrayed in the film.

I couldn't watch more than a couple more minutes. I packaged up the DVD and will put it in the mail box tomorrow. Enough is enough. My wife was right (as usual).

Picture Frame

"Hello"

NYTimes had an article today saying that cruelty of animals leads to further violence. A movie trailer that I saw a couple of days ago (Netflix is sending me the movie tomorrow) depicts the cruelty to animals that we eat. What I don't understand is the double standard many apply to animals. If they are pets, treat them like royalty...and if they are livestock, anything goes. In fact, the article pointed out that "In Idaho, which is one of the states without a felony cruelty penalty, farmers and ranchers are pushing a bill that would more clearly distinguish livestock from pets and would exempt livestock from the protections afforded pets."

So what's the deal? We slaughter one animal to feed another? Who are we kidding?

A New Version of Life

So I had a teacher who said "listen to everyone and believe no one." The Buddha said the same thing, that you shouldn't believe his teachings because he said it. Rather, believe it if your experience verifies his words. 

My Buddhist sewing teacher showed me how to remove chalk marks from my sewing. It didn't work very well. I asked her if I could wash it... and she said no... but then explained to me how to wash it (was there a double message here?). In any case I washed it... and got rid of many of the chalk marks... and then removed more with a fancy eraser. But it is rippled a bit... so I thought I'd find another godless religion, or jump off a bridge after watching a movie trailer about people who do that... or maybe just confess in my blog and leave it at that. So now my sewing is clean and a little dimensional. And since I sit facing the wall in the zendo... who will notice?

Life

So it wasn't how I wanted it. 

I wanted lines and I just got dots and it was terrible. 

Finally I figured it out.