Solitude & The Laughing Buddha Part 1

I love the light, sea air and the feel of water wherever I can get it. I am a natural hedonist.

So when circumstances turned, I choose to visit a secret place, a haven few know about that is about as "other" from anything in Northern California as you can imagine. It is like taking a trip to Bali, a sort of NorCal Bali, but I love it.

I made the trip, and trudged in well equipped with packs and clipped gortex pouches, even a blue "Mac" expandible chair...like I actually know what the hell I am doing.

No one was there...well no one human but myself except the occasional one flying hundreds of feet overhead in a twin-engine Cessna.

So for blocks of time it was silent, or so I thought in the beginning.

___________________

I brought with me Gabriel Garcia Marquez's 100 Years of Solitude and Thomas Merton's Love and Living. Merton, a Trappist Monk, was a solitary.

I am, for now, a solitary of sorts.

Of the perhaps nine to eleven "cells" or bamboo caves, I found mine at the far West end.

I set camp within and under. Settled, I immediately heard the wind moving over the high layered roofs of bamboo like rain. It created that intimacy that one feels cacooned within a warm space while it coldly showers outside.

But there was no real rain. Just cool with warm sand five feet ahead and the beckoning cool waters just beyond that.

Rain would have been nice, on another day, but it was warm, almost hot on the beach, but cool and dark in the caves.

To the far right, by the waters edge, someone had built a tall sand totem to mark their visitation. Probably children.

I duly noted it as I passed , but did not bow (though tempted).

Funny how humans create art everywhere to mark their being. Andre Malraux said "Art is humanity's last defense against death." I like Malraux...In fact, I know his nephew several times removed. But in the end, art is no deterrent, or deferment for death. It is merely a signpost or protest that we actually matter, even in death.

Sooner, rather than later for some...but always soon enough.

But in the meantime, you matter. I matter. Art will not save us...maybe God will save us, maybe God does not exist.

I do think that if God can be found anymore it will be in the most unusual places. God has been driven out of most of the other truly human haunts..most notably the churches.

Want to find God? Go where no one else goes. Find a ridiculous place filled with irony...or a desolate place...just anyplace where the paving and branding of humanity has not squeezed out every last indicator, not broken every last true mirror, has not dried up every last small river or sliver of hope.

Find that place and wait.

God'll show...probably.

If not, you made the effort. Good for you.
_________________

Part Two coming...

Solitude & The Laughing Buddha Part 2

I waded out, still in my swimsuit. The water is not hardly deep enough here...just wide. It is hard for me to get wet enough...but I manage to find a place where I can be in the midde. and stand with only my upper chest in the cool sweet air.

SILENCE.

It moves in on me

the opposite way

noise does

like little invitations

to come out!

It is so quiet.

Everything stories down to almost nothing.

Quiet.

Has it been that long

I have not heard human voices?

Yes.

It has been that long

very long

too long.

It stories down

deeper further and farther

deeper still.

I feel suddenly

ENRAPTURED

How could I EVER

hate being solitary!?

I am simply in delirium as the water washes by, lazy and lovingly. The sun sparkes off the waters...the canyons sing. My head is feeling hot so I dip into the coolness like a kind of unearthly waterery invisible chocolate...and spray the mane back with my big hands and laugh!

In this moment I am not a christian, I am a buddhist, then in the next I am not a buddhist, but in love with the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.

Both are true. I laugh and splash about...alone but not at all so.

In silence it all storied down, then, after a time, it came back alive within new ears. I heard the slight woodpecker determined like a winged Sisyphus, and the finch dancing and darting in sweetness, the flap of dragonflies and the pheasants in their skiddish spray.

But always the water.

Then God took my head in his hands and kissed me on the forehead like a the father I never had, and I looked over and saw the Buddha winking at me from the shoreline.

And I was grateful...deeply grateful.

Solitude & The Laughing Buddha Part 3

After several hours of being alone I wanted to write...but had no pen.

My heart and mind were flooded with perception and I wanted to capture it all, but I have learned from years of experience that it is often this way. Sometimes it is best to just sit down and BE...and not write or chronicle.

The Buddha, sitting by the old rock swing watched me search for a pen, then let out a belly laugh, deep and full..

I stopped looking for it, but 30 minutes later he was distraced by a Grey Heron and I put on my diving shoes and headed for the truck to get my pen.

I am obviously not a very good buddhist. I am also not a good chrirstian. But I'm honest.

Solitude & The Laughing Buddha Part 4

I had been alone and blissful for many hours. You can tell. People travel thousands of miles form here to find themselves on a beach just so, with just so water. And this is all a true story, except I cannot prove that either God the Father or the Buddha actually showed. You can take that as hyperbole if you like, I have a certain well-deserved reputation for that anyway...so feel free.

I started for the truck and was shocked to see two humans approaching...walking down the beach.

It was a man and woman...and he held up his hand just as I did...at just the right distance...to make peace..to come to an understanding out here where no one else was. So funny how aboriginal we truly are, if you are still alive in that way.

He was. So am I.

Few words, the expression, the posturing...It was an immediate understanding.

So in our passing by I noticed his beautiful long brown hair braided back and her long lanky figure within a dark summer dress and straw hat. I could tell from his brief words and accent that he was Eastern European and assumed she might be as well.

When I came back he was in the water naked and unashamed. I saw her up the beach laying on her stomach, long dark and lean, wearing only the straw hat.

It was vaguely Edenic and I liked that they were both there.

Solitude & The Laughing Buddha Part 5

I went back to Marquez under the cool of the bamboo, and poured a glass of wine and set to laying out crackers on this old purple plate I love with cream cheese followed by plump bright orange popping salmon roe.

A christian existentially, a buddhist in practice, blatant hedonist in the moment.

Give me the pop of those delicious ripe eggs spurting their rich salty juice into my mouth.

Without any gawking I had watched them, here and there, dive into the water and then walk back up the beach. They were , and are, simply beautiful...gorgeous. And I wanted to meet them for holy and pure reasons. Kindred spirits...I could see that...would they though?

So I kept reading Marquez. I set out my plate of caviar and poured another glass of wine and drank it down like a fiend and walked out into the shallows and dived in.

He looked like a young Depardeau...thickly European but gorgeous in just that way, he was natural in his own skin...and after a long cold swim I once saw him roll in the hot sand and later just dry out in the air. It took no imagination to see why most any woman would be drawn to him.

With her I felt more self-conscious. Most men objectify women as objects for sex. I do not, or maybe in a rare hormonal moment...I just thought her beautiful and long and her straw hat made it more so...more whimsical. It made me happy to think of them making love, possibly still in love. I hoped this was so for someone, for them, laying next to each other naked in the hot sun.

We all come back so quickly, too quickly, to ourselves and ourselves alone. This may be the disease of this age, but I suspect it is truly the disease of the species.

It seems as constant as inevitable death.

Maybe the way out of both dilemmas is related. Either way, we need out.

Love and death...it comes to this.

Solitude & The Laughing Buddha Part 6

Nude Sunbathers, by Nigel Van Weick. Oil on Panel. Amazing work. See it HERE.
__________________________________________

I had had my time. I had read more Marques and a bit of Merton.

It will be six months before I can return here, as it closes next weekend for Winter.

I slipped the printed poem out of my leather journal. It is called "Silence"..a gift. As shy as I can be, it was the only way I knew to meet my sweet naked nieghbors. I felt it criminal if we did not make some contact.

I think it was because we had been communicating all along, and I wanted to affrim that. It is certainly true that if I had known them before I would have felt no shame in laying naked next to them, or talking about any such thing, any more than I did when I finally approached them on departure. If I see them next Spring I will probably do just that.

They welcomed me openly and we sat in the sand and talked awhile. They were enjoying it, and me too. I gave them my poem and we exchanged emails and handshakes. And they were just as beautiful up close as from afar...even more so because they became more real and less distant.. It was a nice human moment, three naked people with one clothed.

It was a good day.

The glory of God sang around the canyon's rim and the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob belched up air bubbles sheepishly in the shallows around the tadpoles like clues...and His multi-layerd love bounced and radiated off the top of those waters, and She patted the woodpecker on the head and stroked the beaver under it's chin, and gave the complicated soulful man sitting out in the water up to his chest a few hours rest from himself. And She kissed the woman with the straw hat on the forehead and told the braided man he was beautiful as he made his way down the beach to the water, with hot sand on his shoulders seeking release.

And it was good. Very good.

Pre-text for The Haunt of Jackals

"Much is your reading, but not the Word of God,
Much is your building, but not the house of God.
Will you build me a house of plaster, with corrugated roofing,
To be filled with the litter of Sunday newspapers."

T.S. Eliot
Choruses from "the Rock"

The Haunt of Jackals Part 1

Imagine a society where, instead of baking bread for hungry people, they produced mass quantities of pictures of bread and posted ads for them at every corner, and handbills were given out with pictures of different types of bread, hundreds of different types of bread. Pictures of wheat bread, pumpernickel, Jewish rye, banana bread, croissants, sheepherders bread, bread sticks, garlic bread...heck, even melba toast.

Now imagine that these images of bread not only became the dominant mode of exchange (some hoarding these pictures, others spending them as fast as they could get them), but were actually consumed on a daily basis despite the fact that they had no nutritional value whatsoever.

Imagine that, besides the handbills, posters and billboards which depicted the pictures of bread, the evening television news consisted of discussions and international debates over which of these pictures of bread were worth the most, and which were declining in value or had become disreputable as a true picture of bread. Imagine witnessing special interest groups arguing and protesting the advantages and disadvantages of consuming their particular type of bread-pictures. And, of course, in such a world, litigation would be intense over who had the actual rights to each type of bread picture, and there would often be disputes over counterfeit pictures or poor foreign copies had infiltrated the market.

And the entire time that men and women were viewing these billboards, wheat was growing up around the posts. And wherever they stapled posters, streams gurgled by with yeast cultures forming in the shallows and the sun.

What would you make of such a society?

The Haunt of Jackals Part 2

Well if you were an alien and you saw this what would you think?
_____________________________________

Hold that thought while we look at another hypothetical situation.

Suppose you are a disguised alien sent to study Earth culture. Shortly before landing your cloaked ship you notice that mass numbers of vehicles are moving toward a few long large structures situated throughout the greater Sacramento area. You deduce this is either a place of societal worship, or perhaps the seat of regional governments. You decide to investigate. You land in an open field near the corner of Heritage and Challenge Ways, and walk a few blocks to the huge structure along Arden Way. Vehicles are continually swarming past you into the areas around the building stacked up high in racks. You wonder what you will find. You also wonder if your will be allowed in without any credentials. No one pays you any mind as you enter.

Making your way down the center walkway you note that there are large cubicles dividing various goods. Each cubicle has a gigantic word at the front, and the same word posted in smaller forms many other places. You also note that in most of these compartments clothing hangs in the windows bearing the same word in large and colorful letters. One shop says B.U.M., and every item in it says B.U.M. in large letters on the front. But what does B.U.M. signify, you wonder? Many of the people who are passing by are wearing clothing with these bold words. What does it mean?

You want to ask people questions. A small group of women are standing in the walkway occasionally stopping people and asking them a series of questions. They all hold clipboards. You do not have a clipboard. Suddenly, one of the women puts her clipboard down and walks off citing the need for something called a "nacho bellgrande and coke." You wait a few moments, and when no one is looking, borrow the clipboard and leave to another area of the building. As you walk you notice cubicles with the words "GAP," "NIKE," "Guess," "Levi," and "Esprit". People leaving these stores are wearing clothing with these words written boldly over a variety of patterns.

You sit down and write, "I am at the center of either their religion, or commerce, or government. They identify themselves with very important words. Some are devoted to "GAP," others identify in some way with "NIKE" or other significant names. I am going to approach some of them and ask them to explain the meaning of their large words.

Having only a limited knowledge of Earth English, you decide to be direct and hope for a good response.

You stop a young female and ask, "Can I ask questions?"

"Sure, it's a free country," she replies.

You point at her chest and say, "If you were... describing these words to a foreign person, what would you tell them?"

"What words? What are you talking about?"

"Those words: 'GAP' 'BUM' 'NIKE' 'GUESS.' What do they signify?"

"A brand name, a logo," she says.

You search your memory of human languages. "'Brand'... a hot mark on a cow. Not much help. 'Name' ... signifier of identity. Not much help there. What about 'Logo' it means a .... a word!" you think triumphantly. But then think, "these are words that mean word?" The girl looks impatient.

"What is the meaning of these logos?" you ask (hoping it is a sensible question).

"They don't mean anything!" says she. "What kind of question is that?" she asks, cautiously moving away, and then is gone.

You approach several other people, and each time the results are similar. On one occasion you ask an elderly male, "How much does the clothing cost; is there any difference in cost?"
"Yes, the Guess shirt is $10 more than the Levi," he says.

"Then the Guess is a better shirt?" you ask.

"No. Same shirt; it's the name!" he says.

You sit down and write in your logbook, "These large words mean "nothing," yet people wear them on their bodies and display them proudly on their cubicles. This phenomenon needs much more study."

The Haunt of Jackals Part 3

"For the customs of the peoples are a delusion;
Because it is wood cut from the forest,
The work of the hands of a craftsman
with a cutting tool.
They decorate it with silver and gold;
they fasten it... so that it will not totter.
Like a scarecrow in a cucumber field are they,
And they cannot speak;
They must be carried,
because they cannot walk!
Do not fear them, for they can do no harm,
Nor can they do any good"

Jeremiah 10:4-5

Context is everything. Jeremiah makes the above statement in reference to the wooden idols of his time which were crowned with silver and gold. They were objects of great fascination and pretended power and meaning.

The "woods cut from the forest" were, and still are, the materials of creation refashioned into objects of adoration and worship. The decorations of "silver and gold" were the special effects of the day used to adorn these basic objects. Together they formed the idolatrous image upon which the culture was based. Though obviously made by men, that fact was quickly forgotten or repressed in order to bestow the highest possible meaning upon the object, which in turn would tell people who they were.

But what has Jeremiah to do with the story of the bread-picture people and the alien's visit to the mall? And what of our curious title, The Haunt of Jackals?

Imagine that you actually live in just the sort of world our two stories have described: the type of world which feeds upon image and likeness over substance and life; the sort of culture which has devalued the currency of communication to the uttermost degree. Imagine that you live in a society where truth is dominated and informed by the immediate images of that culture, and where the great gift of language and communication...of words...has become the strip-mined ground of advertising, meaningless rhetoric, and titillating slogans.

Now don't imagine it, because you already live there.

Over the last 100 years something unprecedented has taken place. We have moved from a society based on the spoken and written word, to a society based upon visual images. Television, movies and digital media have replaced words as the dominant means of perceiving reality and meaning in this culture.

Where a personal and detailed written description of historic events once provided information, our optic nerves are now bombarded with images of world events from every conceivable angle. Who would have thought, one hundred years ago, that people could routinely view our entire planet from the depths of space, or watch the tiny movements of a human being in its mother's womb?

This shift from words to images as a means of perceiving reality has staggering implications for our culture. Whatever is viewed begins to take on a life of its own. It begins to produce and shape new contexts at a dizzying rate. And these visual contexts, which are being created and embraced by so many, are nothing more than idealized and abstracted pictures of various "lives" which no ever lives. They are the valueless bread pictures eaten by a nation ravenous for the true Bread of Life; they are the meaningless logos imprinted on the clothes of all who need the true Logos to cloth them with His own Self.

George Orwell, in his novel 1984, had already begun to imagine a world where new technologies could be used to control people. But Orwell got the order mixed up. Orwell saw a world where the people were controlled because "Big Brother" was watching them. In our culture it is just the opposite. We are controlled because we are watching Big Brother. Orwell saw millions of lenses and a few viewscreens. Our world is moving toward millions of viewscreens, and fewer and fewer lenses.

And its ironic because it is not only a more effective means of mass control than what Orwell envisioned, the masses also end up paying the bill! There may even come a day where the whole world watches events through one single lens (Don't laugh. How many people were watching a single murder suspect trying to flee in his white Bronco a few years back? Just push it up a few more notches and we are there.)

But for our present purposes, let us just note that the words which people still use are no longer trusted and valued the way they once were. We watch and watch and watch while the ad-men steal and use every word which still has some resonance left to sell us more stuff.

INTERMISSION & QUOTES

"They followed the light and the shadow,
and the light led them toward light
and the shadow led them to darkness,
Worshipping snakes or trees,
worshipping devils rather than nothing;
crying for life beyond life,
for ecstasy not of the flesh.
Waste and void, Waste and void.
and darkness on the face of the deep."

T.S. Eliot
Choruses from "the Rock"

"I like to watch Eve."

Peter Sellers
as "Chance the Gardener" in
Being There

"The sound of a report!
Behold it comes! A great commotion
out of the land of the north
To make the cities of Judah
A desolation, a haunt of Jackals"

Jeremiah 10:22

"Men have left God
not for other gods, they say,
but for no god;
and this has never happened before

That men both deny gods and worship gods,
professing first Reason,
And then Money,
and Power,
and what they call Life,
or Race,
or Dialectic.

The Church disowned,
the tower overthrown,
the bells upturned,
what have we to do
But stand with empty hands
and palms turned upwards
In an age which advances
progressively backwards."

T.S. Eliot
Choruses from "the Rock"

The Haunt of Jackals Part 4

We live in the haunt of jackals. Under the thin veneer of wealth and prosperity is a spiritual desolation which pervades the entire country and its people. And the generations which are moving into the haunt are now standing stunned, "with empty hands and palms turned upwards in an age which advances progressively backwards."

They have inherited a wasteland of trouble, violence and confusion. There is nothing meaningful for them to do, they are alienated from the Church at large because no one has recognized their callings or even bothered to learn their language so they could be reached. They have inherited the haunt of jackals, and the Church hides behind it's fortress walls and speaks more and more to itself about itself and for itself while the riot increases outside.

Or worse, they hide with and then judge, moralize and condemn the very people they are called to love and embrace.

The haunt is a desolate place where fear reigns and everything comes pre-tainted. There are no safe houses in the haunt and it is patrolled by jackals, by wild dogs who despite their individually small stature, are particularly savage. The jackals come in a variety of costumes, the most easily identifiable is the modern media jackal who focuses intently on individual acts of crime, perversion, cynicism and lust. The goal of most modern media is to attract an audience by packaging and re-presenting these base acts while manipulating individuals to purchase goods and services which promise to enhance or provide "life." The jackals fill both programming and advertising.

In modern language, the word "jackal" has a second meaning. A "jackal" can be defined as "a person who collaborates with others in the commission of base acts." We have just begun to see the beginnings of crossovers between the media and the events it reports. Not only do talk shows daily glamorize the normal misery which many people engage in, they are actually beginning to elicit fresh acts of violence and perversion by bringing together destructive forces in front of a television audience. Violence, and even death, have been the results of their lust for the most tantalizing and scandalous stories.

And when one turns off the set, or lays down the latest copy of GQ or LA Style, and walks out into the tired air, the city has been made a place desolate of meaning and beauty. The hard pavements stretch out like a desert, littered with once meaningful words now made multi-colored logos. And the mall has become the modern temple of worship and pretended meaning. We all have their meaningless words printed across our shirts to identify nothing at all.

Idolatry by any other brand is just the same: the modern idolmakers no longer melt down our personal jewelry and fashion out a small hot cow for adoration; now they take our general dreams and deepest longings and use them to re-create a host of techno-images which reflect the resonance of our deepest needs and spiritual aspirations. And as we are less and less able to live up to the expectations of these images, our frustration and alienation grows and our ability to actively engage life and each other is diminished.

Have you noticed that despite the boom in communications technology, people are less and less likely to talk with each other? They talk at each other. They posture, hold their opinions, do their business, but people no longer meet at the city gate and talk with each other. They stay in their darkened apartments and houses and stare at one of the 63 channels on their viewscreen. Their real needs for life are appeased and deflected as they are vicariously run through basic emotional experiences by what they view. And all the while, as they attempt to feed on these empty images, the wheat grows up around the posts, and the streams gurgle by with yeast cultures forming in the shallows and the sun.

The Haunt of Jackals Part 5

Up until now I have kept things general, but now I turn attention to the "Church" at large.

Some of you count yyourselves a part of that mystical body, others not. Either way I think it still worth exploring, right?

[I will define "Church" in the largest of all possible contexts. Despite the particulars of your own "creed" I suppose I would refer to anyone who feels themselves so connected in a spiritual sense. If it helps you can think of what C.S. Lewis called "Mere Christianity".]

Where does the Church, go in an "age which advances progressively backwards?" And how will we communicate the reality of God's good news in Christ in the haunt of jackals? How will Christ be lifted up in an age which is blinded by image and how will we speak of Him in a world that no longer trusts words?

These are the questions which the current generation of believers must wrestle with.

If people in the time of Christ had a hard time understanding who Jesus was and what He was saying, how much more today where the very ways of seeing and hearing are being tampered with?

To further complicate matters, some powerful preachers in America have added a political agenda to their rationalistic dogmatic propositional "faith" (where real faith and trust is no longer required) which has branded the "Church" once again as mostly just dead organized religion.

But we must proceed anyway.

These are no small questions. Let's not shrink back. After all, the original meaning of "Gospel" is simply God's good news, and not even widespread human stupidity and blindness to its reality can alter it.

The very real temptation is for the Church to attempt to keep up with the world and its obsession with images and accumulated information. But I am convinced we must not learn the "way of the nations" or blindly implement the "customs of the peoples" which usually end in delusion. I do not say this out of some emotional reaction to Modernity, or out of some sort of quasi-biblical paranoia. I am simply observing the blackened fruits of a dying culture. Computer information has not resulted in wisdom; the wealth of images has not enhanced anything but our sense of alienation; and the devaluation of words has bankrupted our ability to live in vital relationship with each other.

Do you really see it any differently?

The modern question must be: what is solid, what has meaning and leads to life?

For those who count themselves as skeptics, unbelievers, agnostics, atheists, etc...the thing we all share is that we are spiritual. We share a sort of spiritual DNA that unites us as human beings. And if the truth be told, with some notable exceptions, I find that I often am able to commune more openly with those outside the Christian sub-culture who simply understand that we are spiritual beings as well as physical, sexual, emotional, relational, and intellectual beings (I'm certain I left out other attributes, but you get my drift).

In fact, I often find that the hardest people to really explore with are those who have bought into a commercialized Christianity. The type of Christianity that Kierkegaard would imemdiately call "Christendom"...a sort of official state religion.

That isn't vibrant enough to have any effect in the haunt of jackals. It more often will simply mimic it.

For those who count themselves somewhere within the "Church" (even if they are, like myself, out around the outer rim with one leg dangling over the side) it seems, to me, that regular connection to the vitality of Jesus the Risen is a pretty sure thing.

Those who would communicate faith, hope and love in an age of blindness and distrust, will themselves need active eyes to see and ears to hear this One and be capable of telling others the truth in love. But how can we perceive His work and will more clearly, and hear His leading more fully?

These two questions must be answered by any church which hopes to thrive in the modern world. Because so much depends upon seeing and hearing Christ clearly. And this is no easy thing, and a bit of a mystery really.

It reminds me of the story of the men walking with Jesus after the resurrection. They conversed but really did not get that it was him until they sat down for dinner and broke bread together.

This was real bread, not a depiction, and as they broke it their eyes were opened to the reality, who then vanished.

And they asked each other "didn't our hearts burn as he was explaining the Word to us?"

I do not know about you, but when I am flipping channels and see these preachers up on their huge stages doing their theatrics I am repulsed. But it does quickly gives me heartburn.

The Haunt of Jackals Part 6

Now I am obviously somewhat trapped in my own argument for I am also in the haunt of jackals and subject to it's influence.

I want to proceed to take openly about the spirituality and depth of the Word. But you can easily see the problem can't you?

As soon as I start using the language that has been so misused, misapplied, ripped from its context or just plain ruined by the Religionists I am undone. I'll get the same reception I myself reserve for tele-evangelists (where my eyes glaze over and then roll into the back of my head).

Yet there must be a fresh approach for I think many of us sense that there is truth to be had, and when a "Word" or words come to us, they resonate and have a power and weightiness that we recognize.

So if we hears the words of Martin Luther King and put them next to a series of advertisements, most of us recognize two different forms. And interpersonally, we have all had the experience of being trapped in small talk at a party one hour, then getting into a fascinating discussion the next.

One claim is that the Word that Jesus brought was special, and somehow (I am not sure how this works) he was also the physical embodiment of The Word.

But we never really get to see this Jesus because Religion has so often co-opted this Word. Those in Christendom are so concerned with coercive conversion that safe places for open communication and exploration are rarely found in the haunt.

Which is why atheists, agnostics and freethinkers are so vital to the discussion.

Yes, you heard me correctly.

Vital because they bring a much needed critique of religion that clears away a number of huge obstacles to open discussion and exploration. The irony, of course, is that the biblical records themselves, which claim to be "Word" also echo this distrust of religion. The prophets in the Old Testament have every bit as much distrust for religion and they are not shy about sharing it. And in Jesus day, his most scathing remarks and actions all took place against the hyper-religious. Ordinary folk loved Jesus and enjoyed his company and words.

Even Paul takes on the religious in one town because they wanted to tack on rules and regulations where only faith was desired. It's a shockingly fun story because these relgious folk were requiring circumcision as a part of conversion. Paul, with his usual directness says "why stop with the foreskin?" and says he hopes they castrate themselves instead.

I think there is a clue there, which is it's a good thing to distrust religion, even God does.

The Haunt of Jackals Part 7

You can actually order this sticker or T-shirt HERE.
_________________________________________

My Muse describes herself as a "heathen". I find her more like heaven.

She came up with the verbiage above. I liked it immediately and I hope you do too.

Not all who happen to be believers are closed minded angry bigots. My own mentors in this regard would have to be C.S. Lewis, Tolkein, Walker Percy, Thomas Merton, Flannery O'Conner, Anne Lamott, T.S. Eliot, and, er Bono and Bruce Springsteen.

One thing they all share to some degree is they drop the artificial "we-they" dichotomy, are generally very critical of their own tradition, and are always looking for a fresh "Word".

They are good examples from a "Christian" tradition. But Word comes from all around us and from many traditions. You cannot read Ghandi and not see it as Word, or the Buddha. You cannot read Thich Nyat Hanh and not be moved if you are touch with your own spirituality.

And it is just here that streams of fresh water can flow into the haunt of jackals.

As I see it many of us are sequestered in our various "camps" up in the hills. The jackals bray and bite and the Word has little of no place in the valley below.

What if we left open our own springs and allowed the waters to flow freely into the haunt?

What if we baked real bread and came openly with the gift of that and broke bread together regardless of our own creeds or belief systems and simple talked and explored together?

What if we read the words of Christ with fresh eyes and ears and allowed them to have a life of their own and not be co-opted by dead religion?

Do we have the faith, hope and love enough to do that?

Word.

Beyond Postmodernism: Part One

Ernest Becker.

One hot topic in Postmodern circles is how to rid ourselves of the term "Postmodern". No one wants to be identified primarily by what they are not, or what they object to (unless of course, you are a Protestant, but I digress).

It has been important to keep the term up until now to make it clear that the rationalistic assumptions of Modernity have been rejected. Despite impressive technological and medical advances, the utopian goals of the Enlightenment failed. The grand experiment where humanity shook off the fetters of religion and took up the reigns of existence only resulted in advanced bloodshed, world wars, the A bomb and now terrorism. What started with such loud promise at storming of the Bastille, finally died with a whimper two centuries later with the fall of the Berlin Wall.

So it is understandable that many of us want to identify ourselves as Postmodern. But the term itself is limiting and we need a new term, something beyond Postmodernism. A new term might help us understand the new freedom and possibilities that are in front of us.

And I have a suggestion.

The Suggestion
Note that it is a suggestion, and a hopeful one. The trick is to make it truly open ended enough to be inclusive, yet also formative enough to make sense. Then, of course, it has to resonate and be fair to all parties.

The idea first came to me in the late 80s. I was reading Gregory Bateson's book Toward an Ecology of Mind and trying to see if I could get his ideas to "talk" with my understanding of Ernest Becker's world view as presented in The Denial of Death, (which is one of the most important books written in the 20th Century). In order to see how these two great minds might meet I had to do a great deal of translation, in much the same way that you might place the Buddha's teaching on non-attachment next to Jesus of Nazareth's teaching about the "lilies of the field." You expect some divergence but are looking for some legitimate connections and different angles on the same truthes.

In the background of my mind was Becker's stated desire to form a uniform science of humanity, something that would allow for a multiplicity of voices on any given subject, and integrate exploration via all disciplines instead of pitting them against each other. Becker's vision for this was cut short by his untimely death, but has always seemed one of the most noble projects I had ever heard of.

I mean, imagine for a moment if instead of going into a humanities class and having them castrate or exclude some of the great world traditions, they actually included them and looked for correlations?

________________


Part two: an example

Beyond Postmodernism: Part Two

Now this was, I think, 1989, which means most of us had no idea how the world was going to be changed by this thing we now refer to as "the web", but ironically it was just that image, the image of a web, that came to mind at the time, just a much simpler image. Instead of the hierarchical and competitive system which Modernity championed, this approach would be horizontal and relational.
An example

Here is a simple example within one discipline, psychology. I was a psychology student in the late 70s and was regularly amazed by how zealous and nearly religious were the wars within the department. Each "school" of psychology was a war for dominance in the department, the Behaviorists trying to understand all aspects of human existence within their own narrow view, and the Humanists and Existentialists doing the same. It was an ideological war with no winners because no one was open to other ways of seeing.

But what if the Modernist model of competition and rational argument had given way to a Post Modern sensibility? What if those professors had laid down their philosophical armaments and started to talk with one another and look for correlations in their work? What if the Behaviorist could have seen his own view as merely one lens among many and valued the Humanist's lens, and the Existentialist's lens? Would they not go deeper with three lenses as opposed to the one? And then what if they had interfaced what they saw through the lenses with other lenses? What if they consulted with the award-winning nutritionist on staff in the biology department, and the social theorist in the sociology department?

I realize that may seem simplistic, but two great sayings by Einstein help here:

"Imagination is more powerful than knowledge," and;

"Things should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler."

We'll take the second first. It's simpler that way.

________________

A new model.

Beyond Postmodernism: Part Three

I am afraid to get the point you need to click on the photo above then zoom in. It's worth it!

A Simpler Model
Instead of a highly competition and rationalistic model we have the option of adopting a horizontal and relational model that consists of a flexible web of lenses from which to explore existence and the questions which resonate most for us. These questions can be about anything, from ecological concerns, to deep existential questions about the meaning of existence, to how to create a new pastry or float a toy boat out in the harbor.


I mentioned that this workable model is horizontal. The other thing I said is that it is relational. This is key. It not only does not seek to compete and exclude other ways of seeing and interpreting, it LOOKS for them. Much like search engine "spiders" this flexible web of lenses is always looking for connection, and when it finds it, it celebrates and is able to go deeper..
It is looking for relationship.

Imagination
By now you may be frustrated with me. I mean I promised a new "term" beyond Postmodernism, and instead I have dragged you down this path with seemingly no end in sight. My apologies, but I think it necessary because as Einstein notes "imagination is more powerful than knowledge" and what we are talking about here requires more imagination than it does brain power.

Postmodern sensibilities have made this possible by rejecting the rigid assumptions of Rationalism, re-introducing irony (and thus humility), and creating a new pluralism that is, potentially, non-reductionist. In other words, we can dream about something both useful and achievable. It's an exciting and open time.

So imagine that the universe, everything around us, and also us, is essentially relational.

Just sit with it for a moment, and understand that by relational I am not saying "personal". That's a whole other matter.

Keep it simple but not simpler.

The universe is relational.

Twenty years ago, and under Modernity's iron grip, I would have proceeded to "prove" this to you from a variety of sources, all of them good. I could have argued from almost any platform, from the disquieting notion that human babies die if touch and interaction are withheld, to the fact that astrophysicists talk openly about the relational nature of all energy. Or we could appeal to any Creation myth from any culture and the same relational element would be present.

But in a Postmodern world I am not limited just to such arguments. Just ask yourself "Am I not relational by nature?" Aren't our days and ways filled up by the question of relationships? And don't we have a stunning array of them?

So to return to our emerging model, we can take our flexible web of lenses and seek what we can see through them looking for relationship between the pictures they deliver.

I've been trying to think of a modern phenomenon that is both simple and playful to illustrate this. I think perhaps the Super Bowl is just such a model. Well not so much the game itself but the broadcast of the game itself and all the different lenses that are used to bring as full a presentation as possible to as many as possible.

A variety of lenses are used to record data which is then relayed into a central hub. Some of these lenses are able to record more relevant data than others at various times. So some of the main cameras down on the field at strategic spots get hours of emphasis, whereas the camera outside the stadium is only used twice for a few brief seconds, and the camera that views the city in which the event is held is used only once.

To these camera lenses are added work that has been done by other lenses prior to the game. There are interviews with players, with wives of players, and with the high school coach of the superstar quarterback upon who the hopes of the city reside.

What decides which cameras are emphasized?

Relevance and resonance.

Two weeks after the Super Bowl, the whole crew and all the equipment are shipped to cover the Democratic National Convention. There are no footballs, and the agenda is completely different (except of course that someone wants to win and others to lose).

The same general parameters are used to covert the broadcast, only now the longer range cameras that were so effective two weeks earlier, are not as useful in a more intimate environment. Other cameras that are more mobile and light weight become the best lenses from which to record and broadcast information.

The choices are fairly easy, and, as before, all the same equipment is used, it's just that some lenses are more useful in this situation than they were at the Super Bowl.

Now I have little doubt that some part of this illustration may break down somewhere, but it is meant to illustrate really only one point, and that is the effective use of multiple lenses and how they interact to derive as much relevant data as possible in a non-competitive manner.

Apply the Flexible Web
Below is an illustration of the flexible web. This model is meant to be explorative not normative. Consider it like a simple but extremely adaptable probe. The sort of probe that if sent into the unknown would have the flexibility to mutate, on the fly, as it encountered new and unforeseen environments.

An example?

Okay, let's go back to our psychology department, only this time they have gone through Postmodernization and have seen the Enlightenment experiment for what it was...just one lens, and a limited one. In it's stead is a new model. It is not called Postmodern, it is called Relational.

There I said it.

A possible new term is Relational. You can make it an "ism" if you like, but I kinda like it the way it is for reasons I'll address shortly.

But back to our school. The department has decided that the focus of the program for that year will be depression. Instead of a competitive system with each school of thought trying to out leverage the others, they meet to put forward the best information they each have on the causes and remedies of depression.

The Behaviorists bring relevant data on conditioning; another professor puts forward medical models based upon chemical imbalances; yet another, a Humanist, notes that the philosophical notion of freedom and free will carries with it the inherent problem of trying to sustain meaning, and that the crisis of meaning for human beings is closely tied to depression. The Freudians talk about family dynamics and unconscious urges which effect emotional stability.

All the while they are looking for relationship between this different ways of seeing depression. At the same time, new questions arise about social factors. For this they will need the Sociology Department to help them see more. One student who has been sitting in on the discussion as an aid asks about a culture he read about in his anthropology class that have almost zero cases of depression. Instead of being laughed at, a call is placed ot the author of the book.

Other lenses pop up as well. The biology department is doing a study on endorphin and serotonin levels based on new dietary finds. Another best selling book includes remarkable testimonials of those who have been relieved of depression by prayer or meditation.

Every one of these lenses is used to gather as much information as possible which is then brought into the mix looking for relevance and resonance.

The beauty of this model is that it is flexible, malleable, non-competitive and is open to lenses outside of strict rationalism, while not rejecting its benefits.

It is also non-reductive and therefore truly pluralistic in the best sense of the word.

Beyond Post Modernism
We are not Post Moderns, we are, quite possibly, Relationals. The universe is inherently relational, and as self-conscious and curious beings within creation we are too. It's why we care about the meaning of our lives, and how we relate to each other and this universe. It's why we have children and why love is so important to all of us. It's what lies at the core of being human and our questions about God's existence and what our lives mean. It's what we think about and dream about in some way every day of our lives and are trying to find answers to. Modernity gifted us with many things, but it is time to move beyond it's confines. There is serious and deep work to be done, and it is relational.

Final Reflection

Black Mountain. C. MacDonald 1997.

_______________________

The reflection of Black Mountain is caught in the waters of Nicasio.

It's only in the shallows that we can even see what is the substance and what is the reflection in the soft waters.

It is a beautiful picture enhanced yet accurate in its reflection.

This is what we want in the mirrors we invite into our lives. Clarity, accuracy, grace and beauty.

More tomorrow...The Saint has had his day.

Freewill, Determinism & Attraction

Jennifer Aniston and Courtney Cox.
__________________________

I was in a three-way conversation the other night with bloggers Greg and Sex. Bot ha re wicked smart and fast. It is a rare occasion indeed when The Saint feels outmatched. I felt like I was inbetween Jason Schmidt on the mound and Matt Matheny at the plate and they were both throwing to each other at once.

You could hear the gloves pop!

We were discussing Freewill and Determinism, and perhaps once I get my arm warmed up on the above topic I'll actually take on that conversation and open it up.

But for now I'm gonna use male and female attraction as a way of exploring both that and also the issue of Freewill and Determinism.

__________________________

Why a picture of Aniston and Cox? Well both are recognized as pretty at the very least, perhaps stunning to others. But other than being in good shape and well adorned they have very different looks. One is a kind of classic California blonde, the other more a Dark-haired east Coast beauty.

Of course who knows were they hell they come from? I don't I am, and will be, making gross generalizations through this exploration. If I don't we'll never get anywhere. (So the disclaimer is...yes of course there are exceptions everywhere..okay? Happy now).

Attraction has to do with imprinting, particularly, but not exlusively, with males. As is often the case it is a 60/40 thing.

Freewill, Determinism & Attraction Part Two

So The Saint, Jennifer Aniston and Courtney Cox walk into a bar...

The Saint orders a Rob Roy and sits at the bar. He is approached by Jennifer Aniston after a few minutes.

J: Can I join you?
ST: Why of course, what can I get you?
J: Oh I'll have what you're having.
ST: Oh I'm not sure you'ld like it, it's an acquired taste. Let me make another suggestion.
ST: Henry, could you please get Ms. Aniston an Absolut Equestrienne?
Henry: Right away Mr. Templar.
J: Thank you, you are very kind (she says letting her blonde hair slope down over one eye and smiling the million dollar smile of hers)

They drink and chat for a few minutes. He is careful to stay away from both celebrity questions or personal ones, deciding just to view this as an unadorned meeting between a man and a woman, for that is all they are really.

She seems hurt to him, and vulnerable. Certainly an easy target for a man with his seductive powers. But he cannot help but feel "brotherly", even protective of her. He acknowledges that she is beautiful, but so is his sister.

ST: Jennifer, it has been a pleasure to chat with you (he takes her hand and kisses it respectfully)
J: (She blushes) Well ya! I had fun too.
ST: Come let me take you back to your table, I'm afraid I have an appointment in just a few minutes, but you have been a delightful companion.

The Saint walks her over to their table and looks at Cox and a slight shudder goes through him.

He excuses himself and walks down the street shaking his head.
_________________

Next Courtney.

Freewill, Determinism & Attraction Part Three

So The Saint, Jennifer Aniston and Courtney Cox walk into a bar...

The Saint orders a Rob Roy and sits at the bar. He is approached by Courtney Cox after a few minutes.

C: Can I join you?
ST: Why of course, what can I get you?
C: Oh I'll have what you're having.
ST: Oh it's quite an unusual drink... it's an acquired taste.
ST: Henry, could you please get Ms. Cox one of these?
Henry: Right away Mr. Templar.
ST: You sure you are up for this, I mean a strange man and a strange drink all at once?
C: (she grins) you don't seem so very strange.
ST: Wait till you taste the drink (he grins warmly)
C: You know, it's funny but you look oddly familiar
ST: That is funny because you look beautifully familiar
C: (laughing) yeah...I cannot go anywhere...I cannot believe this bar is empty.
ST: Well except for your beautiful friend over there.
C: Really, she says, letting her dark hair fall across one eye, you think she is beautiful?
ST: Oh she's cute, and you are not allowed to tell her I said that ( I say noting her high cheekbones and the line of her jaw).
C: Okay I won't, (she says leaning in a bit flirtatiously) but why do you look so familiar.
ST: How is your drink?
C: You're evading
ST: Perhaps...
C: Oh God...sputtering a bit (laughing)
ST: I told you, here let me get you a nice Bordeaux.
ST: Henry, a glass of Latour '68 for my guest.
C: So why so mysterious?
ST: I assure you I am not.

I know she is married, so I put my normal thoughts on hold and just enjoy the flirting which becomes more and more intense. True, in an unsaintly moment I wonder how in the hell she could be attracted to what's-his-name.

I thank her for her company and escort her back to her table and leave.

As I walk down the street I am haunted by her look, her smell, her way.

Why am I drawn to this woman and not the other?

Freewill, Determinism & Attraction Part Four

Some people believe we are pre-determined to choose a certain "type"of person and they make a good case (Determinism of sorts). I have no doubt that this series will (hopefully) spur on extensive debate. Remember I am just exploring.

It is my nature.

So why would Jennifer Aniston register like a sister and Courtney Cox (who is married) be problematic for The Saint?

Well, it seems, via imprinting, which happens early on, that I am pre-disposed to dark-haired beauties with high cheekbones.

The pattern is there.

First girl that caught my attention was in second grade...it's a little weird because she looks like my daughter now...except that follows because I was so drawn to her mother. See?

Then in Junior High the same; then in High School, then in Junior College. Dark-haired beauties with high cheekbones. I also tend to like real shape in a woman (real curves)

Then I married a thin little blonde.

I defied the life-long imprinting completely.

Or are there other layers of imprinting?

(Notice we are still in a Deterministic mode)

Freewill, Determinism & Attraction Part Five

So I made a new choice out of Freewill, or did I?

Perhaps I traded one set of imprintation for a deeper, or at least, another one?

Well, my gut tells me that is what happened, but it did not hold.

But note the possibility of at least two if not many more, sets of imprints on the brain that determine what they find attractive.

I mean I cannot fathom being the least bit attracted to Paris Hilton, though obviously many men are. That is really more about physical and psychological imprinting than anything else.

I don't wanna get too technical because I like the free-flow of a more informal discourse, but do check out some brief articles on imprintation and attraction from Wikipedia.

Some brief but good stuff there.

In one article there is the juxtaposition between Freud and Westermarck. I side with Westermarck even though I have studied Freud extensively.

Freud would say "Simon, your own mother was dark haired and has high cheek bones..what do you make of that?"

Westermarck would ask, "Simon, when was the first moment you felt attraction for a girl?"

Personally on this issue, I think Freud was full of shit because I remember that first girl, and maybe in some ways I have been chasing her ever since.

Determined? Yes. Deterministic? Not sure, but there is a high degree of influence at the very least.

But then I see life as more paradoxical than most. I think most people view life in a very linear way, which is not bad, but perhaps limiting.

_____________________

Anyway, I defied the physical imprintation, but perhaps not the psychological/emotional one.

Freewill, Determinism & Attraction Part Six

There is only one explanation, and that is that there are other layers of imprintation that we elicit from one another.

The other thing we have to note is that this is not a one issue question.

There are so many other factors.

There are natural factors that may or may not be the result of imprinting. Smell, voice, the way a person walks, how they smile or laugh.

I remember meeting my friend Kelly for the first time, a tall long-legged red-headed beauty of great intelligence. She warned me ahead of time that "smell" was very important.

We met for tea (so very English) and out of 137 teas we both ordered (separately) the same one.

She looked stunning and sweet across the table.

ST: Is it time for you to smell me now?
K: Well I could do it now, or after tea.
ST: Oh (I grinned) let's get this over.
K: Okay (she stood and put her beautiful face down by my neck and right ear, then sat down).
ST: (I waited a few moments while we flirted...then both laughed) Okay...so the verdict?
K: Very nice indeed (and she blushed).

A week later we met for breakfast and then walked the streets of downtown in deep Fall. I in my long coat, and she with her long flowing red hair and standing a good 5'11" (I am 6' 2").

A most beautiful couple and you could see others admiring us as we walked and laughed and told stories to each other.

We went back to her place and she showed me her art. Amazing work. She put on some old vinyl disks that I love. We spent a few hours. I loved being there.

I left around 2 p.m.

I called her at 4 p.m.

ST: Kells?
K: Yes Simon?
ST: It's like being a brother and sister isn't it?
K: (laughing) Yes, it is.
ST: Can you explain that to me, to us?
K: Nope
ST: Me neither.

And so it went. I still adore her, and we were perfectly matched except for that one thing. I even spent the night one evening, but all we did was curl up and sleep.

Seems like some things are determined, no?

Not yet sure, but the case mounts.

SIDEBAR

I really would not go for either Jennifer Aniston of Courtney Cox.

Why you ask? Are you insane?

No...apparently somewhat determined.

Of the two, I would be predisposed toward Cox for reasons I have stated.

But her abrasive personality would be nails one and two. Her bone-iness would be the final nail in the coffin.

See another early imprint was I respond to a woman who has substance. I am not talking fat (I do not like "big butts and I cannot lie" but some men do apparently).

I was talking with my friend Sex this am via Im and she noted from her discussions with Greg that men tend to take in the "whole picture" and not the details.

I think that is fair.

Of course, Mrs. Connelly above has no flaws or damaging details. But she is one in ten gazillion and should really not be viewed as at all representative of the species in any way.

Hell, I'd be afraid to touch her, and that is not a normal issue for me.

But one thing I wanted to note is that she gets less and less attractive to me as time goes on, not because she is getting older, but because she is becoming a rail of a girl.

I liked her better when she had some meat on her bones and her great figure was just everywhere. Kinda like how the last generation (or maybe two ago) felt about Eva Gardner.

But that is my imprint.

Which brings into view inculturation...Omigod..somebody stop him!!!

Freewill, Determinism & Attraction Part Seven

Culture and media of many forms are what often inform the periphery of our attraction. It is another form of determinism.

Thus, in Rubens day (see above) women who were, to our eyes and sensibility, overweight, were in fact, the Ideal. Plain and simple.

If you think we are any better or more sane just think of Kate Moss.

It's very much a cultural issue. And you are arrogant if you think not.

Be that as it may, within the dominate cultural model we have a wide swing. For example, I happen to like women with really defined curves. My friend Juan likes waifs. They are so thin you could tie a string to them and fly them at the beach.

Imprints.

Rubens, perhaps one of the greatest artists ever, loved to paint these women. He captured every nuance. It's beautiful.

But these days such a woman would not be so appreciated because of our culture.

And I too am affected by that.

My sole point is that there is personal determinism and also cultural determinism to some degree.