The Heart of Buddhism—Irv Jacob—January 31, 2010

Today I want to examine how we can use Buddhist teachings and practice to . . . develop our hearts, and find ways to be compassionate in everything we do. The teachings I describe today are taken from this draft manuscript which includes a bibliography, and I will provide anyone interested with a online copy rather than cite these references verbally.

One thing I have learned in preparing this study is that there are many misinterpretations and a good deal of misinformation about Buddhism in our Western intellectual tradition. Each of these misconceptions is worthy of a Sunday presentation, but today I want to clarify and explain my understanding of the “Heart”‑‑and to do this I will discuss a few issues based on the usage of a special language or jargon used by the dhamma traditions. This special jargon is what is in great part the cause of these misconceptions.

Now, in order to say what I have just said and be understood, I have necessarily used ordinary language, the language we learn and use in public school. Since we are so familiar.with everyday language, we often fail to realize the existence of other quite different and special languages: [for example the languages of academic disciplines such as economics, or law . . .] also the language of Dhamma, is altogether different from the language of everyday.” (Buddhadasa) In many cases the words are the same but because we use these words in a particular context the meanings we assign to them are often different.

Before I finish I will give some examples of this jargon. But first I wish to clarify one point: When we read about historical Buddhism, many authors regard this teaching as a philosophy (not as a religion) because there is no deistic tradition. Buddha was asked many questions which are still being asked today such as:

• Is there a God?
• Who created the world?
• Is there life after death?
• Where is heaven and hell?

The classic answer given by Buddha was silence. He refused to answer these questions purposely because "these profit not, nor have they anything to do with the fundamentals of the religious life, nor do they lead to Supreme Wisdom, the Bliss of Nirvana." Even if answers were given, he said there would "still remain the problems of birth, old age, death, sorrow, lamentation, misery, grief, and despair--all the grim facts of life--and it is for their extinction that I prescribe my teachings."

Buddhism is essentially religious because the teachings lead sincere adherents into having their own experiences that become life changing. No amount of academic or intellectual activity (developing concepts or philosophizing) can replace the experience that comes from diligent and repeated meditation along with sharing with other members of the Sangha.

So even though there is no deistic tradition, Buddhism is not strictly speaking an atheist philosophy, this understanding is left up to each individual, a matter of the Heart. Indeed many people find it possible to continue in their religious traditions and still embrace Buddhism.

How far do we need to go in conforming to the traditions of Buddhism? The Buddha didn’t want his followers to become intellectual slaves to any dogma or teacher, least of all to himself. There are taught ten principles that enable us to discern with our Hearts. The teachings which are truly capable of improving our lives. I will not list all of these-- but briefly:

• do not accept and believe just because something has been passed along and retold through the years or has become a tradition
• do not accept and believe merely because of the reports and news spreading far and wide . . . nor anything written because . . . words can be created, improved, and changed by human hands. We need to use our powers of discrimination to see how those words can be applied to quenching our suffering.
• do not believe just because something fits with the reasoning of logic . . . what we call ‘logics,’ can go wrong if its data or its methods are incorrect [or incorrectly applied.]”
• do not believe or accept just because something appeals to one’s common sense ...or agrees with one’s preconceived opinions and theories.
• do not believe just because the speaker appears believable. Outside appearances and the actual knowledge inside a person can never be identical.
• do not believe just because the preacher, the [charismatic] speaker, is ‘our teacher.’ believe only after adequately considering the advice and putting it to the test of practice… Intellectual and spiritual freedom is best.” (Buddhadasa, 1999, pp. 2-5)

This is the same way that we go about developing our Hearts.

Now I will give some examples of this special Buddhist language. And I want to emphasize that this is much the same phenomenon that occurs in other religions, certainly in Islam compared to the language used by Catholics, they may use similar words in more or less the same ways but the meanings are very different, and Protestants use most of the same words as Catholics, but now after nearly a thousand years of being divided the meanings are often different.

For Buddhism it is taught that: “Having perceived Dhamma, they speak in terms appropriate to their experience, and so Dhamma language comes into being.” This explanation is intended to suggest how the “jargon” of Buddhism developed, not to suggest an elite, secret, or esoteric language.

Buddhism teaches that our existence is, thusness, tathagata, suchness, what is, the here and now. In many places in Buddhist texts the word ‘birth’ and ‘rebirth’ are used but this is a specialized usage. “In everyday language, the word ‘birth’ refers to physically coming into the world. . . In Dhamma language, the word ‘birth’ refers to the birth of the idea ‘I’ or ‘ego’ that arises in the mind throughout each day. In this sense, the ordinary person is born very often, time and time again; . . . a person well advanced in practice (ariyan, noble one) is born less frequently still, and ultimately ceases being born altogether [arahant.]” (Buddhadasa) Because they live without “I” and ego guiding their lives.

Thus the idea that finding nirvana is about gaining enlightenment and thus not needing to suffer again from another reincarnation, is a misinterpretation of Buddhism, although this is taught in many Hindu traditions. In most Buddhist traditions today, “rebirth” is about what is happening in our daily lives.

For most people Buddhism is a very pragmatic teaching: one teacher warns: “If we bring magical and sacred things into Buddhism, it will become just more bowing to and worshiping holy things, requesting whatever we want without doing anything. That's a religion of begging and pleading; that isn't Buddhism at all. Instead, we must behave and practice in correct accordance with the law of nature . . . “ (Buddhadasa) These instructions are as democratic as the nature of the very earliest Buddhist teachings that advocated the abolition of the caste system.

The emphasis on developing the Heart is one case where the Western usage of “Heart” as a useful allegory is familiar and similar to the Buddhist usage. We can have a “full heart,” a “broken heart,” a “soft heart,” a “kind heart,” when we are in love we speak “the language of our hearts”. . . and in each case we have thousands of years of usage to corroborate a meaning for us in our ordinary language, and it is the same in all Western romance languages.

In Buddhism the use of the word “Heart” is composed of what we ordinarily think of as our compassion, memories, mind and consciousness. This is an active allegory, one that can become the repository for our learning gains from the practice of Buddhism, thus we develop our hearts and this can be what guides our lives.

Part of my intention here today is to invite each of you to open your hearts, to have reasonable doubts. I have tried to suggest how we develop our hearts --which is the main focus of the teachings about meditation, rituals, chanting and practices of Buddhism. It is in our Hearts where we can find a space that is devoid of egocentricity, it is in our Hearts where sharing and caring originates. It is in our Hearts where we test the explanations about “creation” for example. It is in our hearts where we put aside gender distinctions that have plagued our society and can still be found in some Buddhist traditions in Asia.

Let me put this together: Recall that I said: “In Dhamma language, the word ‘birth’ refers to the birth of the idea ‘I’ or ‘ego’ that arises in the mind throughout each day." ---It is a universal teaching of Buddhism to get rid of the I, ego-centered life full of craving and grasping and greed – because these attitudes often lead to undesirable and unintended consequences-- But how do we eliminate the sense of my and mine? and still live a normal life?

When I realized that this teaching is based on another special use of language and that it applies to the growth and development of our Hearts, suddenly I could see how it was possible to do this. We can live a normal life working and being happy with our families, using ordinary grammar and prepositions like I, my, they, you etc., and independently develop our hearts to lead us toward developing we, our, all, and find ways to be compassionate in everything we do.

I am not here to tell you that I have actually achieved this kind of enlightened and purified heart, Libby will vouch for my need for modesty in this respect. But I want to leave you with one thought: this idea of developing our Hearts through the practice of Buddhist meditation, rather than just a simple practice of developing self-discipline, is the key to the value of Buddhism in our contemporary society.

The teachings of the religion [of Buddhism] leads to this point: The heart comes first, the heart is chief, the heart is the principal factor. All dhammas come down to the heart. So this is where we should straighten things out. Get so that the heart is shining and bright.” (Boowa, pg. 86) When we develop our Hearts to the point where we are guided in our actions by a gracious and thoughtful sentiment, we are following our hearts and the intention of the Buddha.

Religious Fundamentalism– A Concern but not a Disaster-- Keith Haskell--October 10, 2010

May I start with a few words about myself. I was born in Portsmouth in Southern England but for the past 35 years my home has been near the small town of Alton. Alton hasn't made a huge mark on history: it was the scene of a battle in our Civil War in 1642 and the novelist Jane Austen wrote almost all her books in a village just a mile away. But it has a place in what I plan to say, and I shall be coming back to it later.

After graduating I spent 38 years in the British Diplomatic Service: 12 of them in countries which are mainly or wholly Muslim. So I have had many opportunities to observe Muslim society at close quarters and see both the good and the dark side of Islam.

You probably know that the numerous strands of Islamic thought and belief belong to one of two main traditions, the Sunni and the Shia. The split between them is a very ancient one, going back to a dispute about the leadership of Islam only decades after the death of the Prophet Muhammad. But both traditions emphasise the central role of the Koran, which among other things enjoins Muslims to respect the faith of other “people of the Book,” including Jews, Christians and Sabaens. So those who commit acts of terrorism against Western society, such as the terrible sequence of events on 9/11, are acting in defiance of one of the basic principles of their religion. The vast majority of Muslims, who want peace and fellowship with their non-Muslim neighbours are dismayed by some of the things that have been and are being done in the name of their faith.

I mentioned the split between the Sunni and Shia traditions of Islam. It would no doubt be tidier and easier to understand if Islamic fundamentalists and the terrorists whom they support belonged exclusively to one tradition or the other. But this is not the case. Muslim terrorists who follow the Sunni tradition include Al-Qa'ida, whose origins were in Saudi Arabia, though it now has followers also in Yemen, Somalia and several North African countries, and Hamas in Palestine. Among those who follow the Shia tradition are Hizb'allah in Southern Lebanon, as well as smaller groups sponsored by the Islamic Republic of Iran.

However it is perfectly possible to be an Islamic fundamentalist and not support terrorism. Citizens of Saudi Arabia belong overwhelmingly to the Wahhabi strand of Islamic thought. Individual Saudis have become terrorists: for example, Osama bin Laden came from one of Saudi Arabia's wealthiest families, although his relatives have now disowned him and he them. Moreover, more than half of the aircraft hijackers on 9/11 were Saudis. But the government and religious authorities of Saudi Arabia have condemned acts of terrorism, and those preparing to commit such acts are liable to be arrested, questioned and sentenced to long terms of imprisonment.

One needs to be cautious about drawing any sort of parallel between Islamic and Christian fundamentalism. However one can see a clear distinction between those Christians who reject the teachings of Islam and the few who appear anxious to express their rejection as offensively as possible: for example, the Protestant pastor who recently announced his intention to organise a mass burning of copies of the Koran, and was fortunately dissuaded from doing so at the last moment. As Voltaire is alleged to have said 250 years ago: “I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it”. Interestingly, although Muslim extremists frequently burn the American flag at their demonstrations, I cannot recall them ever burning a Bible.

Just as there is a difference between Muslims who maintain a strict observance of their faith but oppose violence, and those who are prepared to give support to terrorism, so it is important to understand the motives of the terrorists themselves. For some, violence against the West appears to be an end in itself, and attempts to draw them into any sort of negotiation or dialogue are never likely to enjoy success. But the majority are -wrongly, but sometimes understandably – using violence to solve a political problem. If that problem is solved to the satisfaction of the parties affected by it, there is real hope that the violence will end.

Ireland is a good example of this. Both the Catholics, who supported the Irish Republican Army, and the Protestants, who opposed it, were (and still are) religious fundamentalists. But patient work by Prime Ministers Major and Blair, with strong support from President Clinton and Senator Mitchell, resulted in an agreement under which the Catholics in Northern Ireland were no longer denied their full civil rights, but the territory remained part of the United Kingdom. A few extremists from both sides commit occasional acts of violence, but the vast majority of both communities respect the agreement.

The situation in the Middle East is similar. If an agreement could be reached between Israel and the Palestinians, the ground would be cut from under the feet of Hamas and all other Arab groups which claim that they have resorted to violence only because negotiations had led nowhere. But it must be an agreement from which both sides benefit, not simply a Palestinian surrender to Israeli military power. At the moment, Jewish fundamentalism, not Muslim, is the greatest obstacle to meaningful negotiations. Israel's electoral system tends to give small parties with extremist views more influence than their size deserves. Jewish fundamentalists have set their face against any concessions to Palestinian views – such as a freeze on construction of new settlements on Palestinian land as long as negotiations are still in progress. Despite President Obama's personal commitment, a settlement of the dispute will not be easily or quickly reached.

Well, enough doom and gloom. There are many positive aspects to Muslim relations with other faiths which must not be overlooked. At the beginning of this talk I said I would be coming back to the story of my home town, Alton. Five or six years ago, it was announced that the Ahmadiyya Muslim Association of the UK had bought a 200-acre site very close by on which they proposed to hold their annual Jalsa Salana, or convention. A temporary tent city would be put up each year to provide accommodation and feeding areas, as well as conference facilities, for up to 30,000 visitors.

The reaction was mixed, and certainly not entirely welcoming. Alton has very few Muslim residents, and most people's knowledge of Islam came from alarmist newspaper stories of terrorist acts and inflammatory sermons at one or two London mosques. But as they have come to know and understand Alton's temporary guests, nothing but praise has emerged. Each year the campsite is well-organised and scrupulously clean and creates no noise or other nuisance to disturb its neighbours. Fund-raising events are organised – for example a sponsored walk from Alton railway station to the camp site – with half the proceeds going to local charities. Non-Muslims are welcome at all the sessions of the convention, and numerous Members of Parliament and local councillors have come to see and listen for themselves. And they will have been reassured to hear the Khalifa – the world-wide Head of the Association – say in his address: “Those who love and yearn for peace should stand united against terror and jihadist violence”.

Unfortunately, the information media have discovered that sensational stories about terrorism and violence sell more copies of newspapers and attract higher TV audiences than stories about peace and love. Back in February 1979 I was British Consul-General in Dubai and responsible for organising a State Visit by The Queen. She arrived on a Sunday, and after an introductory tour of the city by motorcade, she wished to attend evensong in the British church. The Ruler of Dubai, Shaikh Rashid, escorted her to the church door. After evensong, there was a two-hour gap in the programme before a State Banquet, so I took the opportunity to call at the media centre, to see if any of the journalists accompanying the royal party needed information or any other help.

The only question asked by the journalists was whether there were any British subjects in jail in Dubai, and if so, whether they were likely to be executed or flogged. I told them that there were two British subjects serving relatively short terms of imprisonment for what I considered serious crimes: they were held in air-conditioned cells and their main complaint was that they didn't have enough reading material in English. I then went on to mention The Queen's visit to the church, pointing out that Shaikh Rashid himself, though a devout Muslim, had escorted her to the door. Not only that, but the church was built on land which he had donated free of charge, and he himself laid the foundation stone 10 years earlier. Several of the journalists ostentatiously put down their pencils with a look of disgust. What they wanted was stories of violence and intolerance, and I wasn't giving them any.

Muslim fundamentalism does of course exist, but I hope and believe that the attitudes of the Ahmadiyya Muslims and Shaikh Rashid are more typical of majority Muslim belief. To quote another Ahmadiyya spokesman: If we are attacked with violence, we don't respond with violence … the best way of changing the world is through persuasion”. That is a message with which I think we can all agree.

My Ministry in Second Life--Aug. 29, 2010--Fred Toerne

On March 5 of this year I was born to Second Life.
In the virtual world known as Second Life,
that is really how they refer to it.
One is born into that virtual world.
A virtual world is like a video game,
with a three dimensional environment
rendered onto a two dimensional computer screen.
Second Life is a free (no charge) virtual environment,
but of course, it’s possible to spend a LOT of money there!
When you enter Second Life for the first time,
you are given an avatar,
an onscreen virtual body
in which you appear to yourself and others.You choose your name, and your name
and your virtual body will be yours all through your Second Life.
They’re working on ways to let you change your name,
At least in the way it appears on screen,
But so far, you cannot change it.
You can, however change the appearance of your avatar,
And that is one of the first ways you will find
To spend real money
in this virtual world.
You can buy clothes, shoes, hair, skin, eyes, and all sorts of ways
to change the appearance of your avatar.
In fact, you can appear to be almost anything or anyone you want!
The concept of an avatar comes from ancient Vedic religion.
A divine being, usually the god, Vishnu,
Takes on physical form, often human form,
In order to appear in our world
And to help people move toward salvation.
In the movie, Avatar,
the leading characters placed their consciousness into bodies
that appeared like the inhabitants of an alien world.
In the avatar bodies, they could survive in an alien environment
And interact with the other beings whom they found there.
Likewise, in Second Life, each resident of that virtual world
Can take on a form of her or his own choosing
And interact with the environment and the creatures
That he or she will find there.
On our bulletin for today is a picture of my avatar,
Standing to one side of the Church of the Dawntreader,
With ocean and waves as the background
and rocks that resemble those of the Oregon Coast.
My avatar in the picture is wearing a traditional clerical collar,
And that’s what I usually wear to lead worship.
That’s why I’m wearing a clerical collar this morning -
so that I’m dressed like my avatar.
The Church of the Dawntreader is really a beautiful virtual place;
it is there that I lead worship services every Thursday at 10:00a.m.
People from all over the world gather there,
So there is one universal time zone, our own time zone,
Since the company that runs Second Life, Linden Labs,
Is located in San Francisco, California,
And their time zone is the same as ours.
The first time I attended a worship service
at the church of the Dawntreader,
I was somewhat startled
To find a dragon in attendance!
I wasn’t sure what to think, as you can probably imagine.
Maybe I should not have been so surprised…
The church was named for one of the Chronicles of Narnia,
The Voyage of the Dawn Treader,
where one of the major characters turns into a dragon.
(You might want to watch movie listings –
the movie version of that book is coming out in December. )
At any rate, the dragon sat respectfully during the service
And participated in the discussion period afterward.
By now, I’ve gotten used to the idea of sharing worship
With all kinds of creatures. One frequent attendee is a blue, furry fox.
In the case of Second Life –
and in the Furry community in the real world –
the term furry refers to anthropomorphized animals,
also sometimes called “anthros.”
All kinds of creatures are welcome at the Dawntreader church,
And it is a welcoming congregation for LGBTQIA folk,
Much like our own UUCP.
(Wow – that’s quite a serving of alphabet soup, isn’t it?)
As you can probably imagine,
Many of the church and religious groups in Second Life,
Just as in First (or real) Life,
Are not so welcoming of people who are different
in various ways.
Part of the ministry of the Church of the Dawntreader,
And part of my own ministry there,
Is to provide a place and opportunity for refuge
For those who feel or who actually have been excluded
From other spiritual communities –
again, in Second Life and in Real Life.
One example is a church musician
who was asked to stay away
from the church he was serving in Second Life
because he was known to be male,
and yet enjoyed appearing as a female avatar.
It’s sad that discrimination of that sort takes place
Even in a virtual world where almost anything goes
In the name of religion.
But the Dawntreader church is very open and welcoming.
I could not be there otherwise.
In fact, before inviting me to serve as a pastor there,
The founding pastor asked me about the church’s statement
on the subject of homosexuality.
In brief, it says that “pelvic issues”
Are not central to the Gospel,
But Charity might be!
I told him that I agreed wholeheartedly,
And I’ve been leading services there weekly ever since.
The experience is important to me in a number of ways.
In sharing some of them with you,
I hope that we can think together about some of the ways
That virtual worlds can bring people together
And even promote peace in the world.
There are Unitarian churches and fellowships
that meet in Second Life.
I find my need for the depth and breadth of Unitarian spirituality
Is met right here at home, in my real life.
As I’ve said before to many of you,
Nowhere else in my life
Have I been able to experience and express
The full range of my own spirituality
except right here with you.
At the same time,
I have felt a need for an opportunity
to share my own Christian faith more fully,
and the church in Second Life
has given me the opportunity.
I am a Christian agnostic:
That is, I approach my own faith
from a position of not knowing.
I just cannot buy the a priori assumptions of the theist,
Taking the idea of the existence of God
As an assumption before we even begin
to talk about what and how we believe – or don’t believe. I find the presence of the Divine in each and every one of you,
And that is enough of God for me to see and know.
So I’m very much at home here, and I guess I always will be.
I choose to call the presence of God that I see in you
By the name of Christ,
And so I am a Christian.
I have also sensed the same Divine Presence in many people
From all over the world
Whom I have met only by encountering their avatars
And sharing in conversation with them,
through online chat.
The difference and the beauty of Second Life
As a graphics based chat client
Is the opportunity to meet people in a form they have chosen.
Let’s face it:
The bodies in which we are present together in this beautiful –
And newly beautified – place
Are an imperfect representation
of the minds that are inside those bodies.
With an avatar in a virtual world,
We have the opportunity to appear in a form
That better represents who we really are.
That immersive quality,
Of meeting people as we choose to be,
Is a unique way to come together
As people who could meet each other
in no other way than online.
And Second Life offers an opportunity to meet people
in many different environments,
in parks and cities,
in dance clubs and homes
in churches and temples
even in representations
of outer space and other worlds.
At any given moment in time
There are 40,000 to 70,000 people present in Second Life,
So there are plenty of opportunities to meet people
from many different places and ways of life.
It is a unique way of engaging people for dialogue
and for education.
Our own local universities are deeply involved in Second Life.
Washington State University has two regions in Second Life,
And many of the buildings from the campus in Pullman
Are represented in virtual form
On the virtual campus.
The University of Idaho is even more involved.
They have a virtual representation of the old Admin Building,
The I – Tower, and some of the physical features of the campus.
In fact, just for fun, I want to share with you that my best friend,
Who is in the congregation this morning,
And is a graduate of the University of Idaho,
Has a photograph of his avatar
Standing proudly on the top
Of the virtual representation of the I – Tower.
But best and most important of all,
in the region known as Idahonia,
far above the virtual campus with its trees and hills
is a “Skydome.”
The Skydome is a Skybox, as they are called,
a building that floats in the virtual sky
above the virtual ground of Second Life,
and there they have virtual classrooms
where students from all over the world
can attend real classes with real professors
in real time
and have real interactions
with each other.
They even have a special animation
That allows the students to raise their hands to ask a question.
The professors can tell who has raised their hands
and how long the hands have been raised in each case.
Another way Second Life has been a great opportunity for people
Has been allowing people with different kinds of abilities
To get out into the world
And interact with others
in ways that we could not do otherwise.
As some of you know all too well,
I have a sometimes debilitating condition
known as Meniere’s Disease.
It causes dizziness and a sensation like seasickness,
sometimes even when I’m just walking around inside my home.
At the very least it can make it difficult to get around
and impossible to drive.
Much of the time I can do very well,
Even in the middle of an episode
If I can just stay very still and quiet,
preferably sitting up and doing something interesting.
Needless to say, it’s very difficult to do any kind of ministry
while sitting very still and quiet,
but I CAN do it in Second Life.
It has been a very great opportunity for me
To share my abilities
And to get to know lots of interesting people
at the church in this virtual world.
I am not alone in experiencing this kind of interesting second life
despite the inability to do things that most people take for granted.
There is an organization that works within Second Life
Called Virtual Ability, Inc.
That reaches out to people with different abilities and challenges
Including the inability to see, hear, think or learn
according to common patterns.
There are so many opportunities to explore
Within the virtual world of Second Life
That all I can do at this point is list some of them.
Second Life has a virtual economy worth billions of dollars
in U.S. currency.
Linden Labs, the parent company is a billion dollar company,
And they make their money primarily
From the sale of virtual land,
space on their servers, in effect.
The first person to make a million dollars (U.S.)
In the context of a video game
Made his money on Second Life.
On the land that people buy
They can build homes, offices, parks, woodlands, lakes –
- almost anything one can imagine.
In fact, the creation of content for Second Life
Is entirely the work of the people who play the game,
The residents of Second Life, as we are called.
Much of the content is free or very inexpensive.
One can find avatars, clothing, houses, furnishings, animations,
And many other kinds of content for one’s Second Life
At no charge at all or for only pennies.
Music and other art forms are to be found on Second Life
in abundance.
Live music concerts, where musicians and their audiences gather
In avatar form
In all sorts of venues
are happening constantly.
Dance animations enable people to participate, at least on screen.
There are often 300 or more opportunities to share
In performances of live music
In any given 24 hour period.
Sometimes the music is really very good.
There are hundreds of art museums –
even opportunities to purchase original works of art -
in Second Life.
Governments and businesses have facilities
For meetings and the dissemination of information
In their own buildings and on their own land
In Second Life.
Where so many people are able to gather and communicate
Where so many shared experiences can lead to friendship
World peace can surely be promoted:
At any rate, that is one of my hopes.
I could go on and on,
But I think it’s high time for me to stop.
If you want to learn more, ask me – or better –
Just visit secondlife.com,
with secondlife as a single word.
You can read about it, watch videos about it,
Maybe even get your own avatar and visit to see for yourself.
For now, Second Life is open
only to those 18 years of age or older,
although 16 and 17 year olds will soon be able to join.
If you do come into Second Life, please let me know:
Give me your avatar name, and I will “friend” you.
I’ll be delighted to chat with you and show you around.
Whether you are interested in seeing for yourself or not,
I feel that knowing about the virtual world of Second Life
Is worth the time we have invested this morning.
Blessed be!

Social Action in the 19th Century: Margaret Fuller: May 23, 2010--Judy LaLonde, speaker

In 1884, the biography of a writer characterized as one “whose aims were high and whose services great; one whose intellect was uncommon, whose activity incessant, whose life varied, and whose death dramatic,” was published in the American Men of Letters series that its publishers touted as a history of American literature. Biographers of the twenty-five men of letters were qualified to render insightful critical estimates because they were familiar with the surroundings in which their subjects lived and understood the conditions under which American literature developed. Part of a typically Victorian effort to promote the national identity, the series featured the lives of James Fennimore Cooper, Washington Irving, Nathaniel Hawthorne, Henry Wadsworth Longfellow, and Ralph Waldo Emerson, for example.


You may with good reason wonder why I begin a talk about Margaret Fuller by describing a series of biographies about American Men of Letters. The fact is that one of these 25 biographies was not of a man, but of a woman that the female “man of letters” was Margaret Fuller.
Fuller’s biography for this series was authored by Thomas Wentworth Higginson.



Higginson is most recognized, if at all by those not scholars of the 19th century, as Emily Dickinson’s first editor. Higginson was himself a prolific writer, a Unitarian minister and orator, historian, naturalist, translator, and an ardent leader in a variety of reform movements. Taking an active role in the growing suffrage movement at mid-century, he signed the call for the first national woman’s convention. Six years later, Higginson refused to sit on a committee formed to determine whether or not women delegates to a temperance meeting would be recognized, and when a negative decision was made, he left the hall, inviting those in favor of a “whole” worlds’ temperance convention to meet elsewhere. Higginson championed the social and political equality of women, encouraging them to develop their individual talents. But enough of Higginson.


This year is the 200th anniversary of Margaret Fuller’s birth. The UUA, which has encouraged congregations to take a journey of discovery to learn about Fuller, describes her as an author, conversationalist, journalist, friend, companion, mother, and wife.” She was also a feminist, a reformer and a political revolutionary.


We are familiar with many of our UU forbears of the early to mid-nineteenth century. Most, however, do not even recognize the name Margaret Fuller let alone know why she might be a topic for a Sunday talk. The Rev. Christine Hillman, who received the “Ministerial Sisterhood Unitarian Universalist Sermon Award in 2000 for a talk on Fuller, (which, by the way, you can read on the UUA website for worship resources) understood the problem of presenting a biography of Fuller (or any other UU forbear) as a sermon. She presented Fuller, not as an example of a one-dimensional heroine we should emulate, but as someone who had difficulties in her life. Fuller, as Hillman writes, “struggled and wrestled to meet the issues of the day head on and made mistakes, alienated people closer to her, alienated the nation for awhile, left the country to escape the mess.” Hillman goes on, Fuller “wasn’t an easy woman. She wouldn’t have been Margaret Fuller if she had been a simple person. She wouldn’t be a model if she had simply been a woman of her time.”


Margaret Fuller’s own desire for knowledge and action and the subsequent fulfillment of that desire became the keynote of her life as interpreted by Higginson. Establishing the theme in the introductory chapter of his biography, he claims that Fuller most desired “a career of mingled thought and action as she finally found. Higginson considers Fuller’s intellect subservient to her “vigorous executive side,” her literary life merely preliminary to a life of action by which, he claims, she would rather have been judged.


But to acquaint you with at least a rudimentary knowledge of Fuller, we go back to 1810, to Massachusetts where Fuller was born, the eldest daughter of eight. Her parents were Unitarians—her father was a prominent lawyer and later, Congressman. Under her father’s insistence, she learned to read at age 3 and was reading Latin at age 6; A taskmaster, her father “demanded accuracy and clearness in everything.” Fuller explained his rules: you must not speak unless you make your meaning perfectly intelligible to the person addressed; must not express a thought unless you can give a reason for it, must not make a statement unless sure of all particulars.” She described herself as being fed on “meat instead of milk"; she thought of herself as a living mind, not a child. As a result, she suffered nightmares, insomnia, and headaches most of her life.


The family moved to Connecticut where she attended a finishing school off and on. At age 15, after leaving school, she continued a self-imposed education: her daily schedule apparently began at 5 in the morning and ended at 11 at night, included reading literary and philosophical works in four languages, walking, singing and playing the piano. The family returned to Cambridge in early 1830s where she became acquainted with Emerson, Thoreau, Channing, Theodore Parker and others central to the Transcendentalist movement.


At the age of 25, following the death of her father, she essentially took control of her family. They were not well off, and Fuller supported them by teaching, one of the few acceptable vocations available during her lifetime. One transcendentalist, Bronson Alcott (father of Louisa May Alcott and an influential educational reformer) had established a rather revolutionary and controversial school where learning was based on the Socratic method: Alcott believed that learning was the result of dialogue between pupil and teacher and is famous, or infamous for his Dialogues with children on the meaning of the Bible. Fuller taught there until after the admittance of a mulatto girl, the final straw, the school folded and she took a position of principal of a school in Providence R.I. During that entire period, she also taught classes of her own in French, German and Italian and translated German literary works into English.
By 1839, her brothers were self supporting.



Higginson describes Fuller’s next move as a response to her desire to contribute to society while continuing to support herself. She moved to Boston and from 1839 to 1844, she held a series of “Conversions,” seminars for women that were “designed to encourage women in self-expression and independent thinking.” Since there was a ban on public speaking by women for pay at that time, this was done in violation of the law.


The Conversations were held in the Boston bookstore owned by Elizabeth Peabody. The meetings started with 25 women willing to commit to 13 weeks, meeting once a week from noon to two, willing to discuss issues such as “what were we born to do? How shall we do it?” Charged $10 for the first week; the fee doubled as attendance grew. The first Conversation was about the advantage men have in terms of education over women. Here, again, she used the Socratic Method: each session was devoted to a philosophical question and she would engage the participants in discussion and dialogue before expounding her own view with clarity and expression that “dazzled” her listeners. That women could have their own opinions on matters outside their sphere proved an intoxicating proposition.


The Conversations were very popular--over the five-year period, more than 200 women participated and the Conversations became a strong base for feminism in New England, including wives of famous men like Emerson, Theodore Parker and Hawthorne, as well as other women who were developing their own work and careers, often as writers.


During that same time period, Fuller co-founded with Emerson and George Ripley the transcendentalist journal The Dial. The journal was an offshoot of the Transcendental Club whose meetings began the movement (Peobody and Fuller were the only female members of that loosely organized club). Transcendentalism dominated the thinking of the mid 19th century and influenced thought well into the 20th century by its expression of a national spirit, messages of confident self-identity, spiritual progress and social justice as well as a celebration of the grandeur of the American soul. For three years, Fuller coaxed articles and poetry from reluctant writers, rejected unsuitable material (even from Emerson) and wrote much of the content herself, including a landmark essay called “The Great Lawsuit: Man Vs. Men and Woman vs. Women.”


The essay was revised later into Fuller’s best known work, Women in the Nineteenth Century. In that, she attacks the hypocrisy of man that allowed him to champion freedom for blacks while maintaining legislation to restrict the rights of woman; a hypocrisy that saw man complain about woman’s physical and emotional unsuitability for positions of responsibility in public life, yet insist that she be a field hand, a nurse, the one to raise and socialize children. Fuller made arguments for full equality of opportunity for women and for abolishing stereotyped gender roles. Susan B. Anthony believed Fuller’s work had “more influence on the thought of American women than any woman previous to her time.”



The following is a dialogue from that book, which represents Fuller’s response in advance of criticism against women leaving their traditional sphere:


I would have woman lay aside all thought, such as being taught and led by men. I would have her, like the Indian girl, dedicate herself to the sun, the sun of truth, and go nowhere if his beams did not make clear the path. I would have her free from compromise, complaisance, from helplessness, because I would have her good enough and strong enough to love one and all beings, from the fullness, not the poverty of being.



Is it not enough . . . that you have done all you could to break up the national union, and thus destroy the prosperity of our country, but now you must be trying to break up family union, to take my wife away from the cradle and the kitchen-hearth to vote at polls, and preach from a pulpit? Of course, if she does such things, she cannot attend to those of her own sphere. She is happy enough as she is. She has more leisure than I have---every means of improvement, every indulgence."



"Have you asked her whether she was satisfied with these indulgences?"



"No, but I know she is. She is too amiable to desire what would make me unhappy, and too judicious to wish to step beyond the sphere of her sex. I will never consent to have our peace disturbed by any such discussions."



"'Consent-- you?' it is not consent from you that is in question - it is assent from your wife."



"Am not I the head of my house?"



"You are not the head of your wife. God has given a mind of her own."



"I am the head, and she the heart."



"God grant you play true to one another, then! I suppose I am to be grateful that you did not say she was only the hand. If the head represses no natural pulse of the heart, there can be no question as to your giving your consent. . . There is no need of precaution, of indulgence, nor consent. But our doubt is whether the heart does consent with the head, or only obeys its decrees with a passiveness that precludes the exercise of its natural powers, or a repugnance that turns sweet qualities to bitter, or a doubt that lays waste the fair occasions of life. It is to ascertain the truth that we propose some liberating measures."



After she turned the Dial over to Emerson, she toured the Great Lakes Territory and when she returned, authored the book Summer on the Lakes. Through the mediation of friends, Fuller was permitted to use the Houghton Library at Harvard to assist in her research, the first female scholar so honored. You will recall, women were not permitted to attend colleges at this time.
Summer on the Lakes is not a great work of literature, but as contemporary critic Joel Myerson writes, the value lies in Fuller’s emerging strain of social criticism. In it she sympathizes with the plight of Indians, their betrayal by white men and decries white man’s sense of superiority. She worried about attempts of women she met to imitate Eastern standards of culture at the expense of losing what was unique to the west. She wrote of how hard it was for women who had been taught only to be ornaments of society.


The book helped her gain attention as an author and attracted the attention of Horace Greeley, owner and editor of the New York Tribune, who offered her a position in New York as literary and cultural critic for the paper. The Tribune was only 3 years old at the time.


Her move to NY in 1844 marks a distinct change in her life and career. It was a career, according to Higginson, of mingled thoughts and action such as she always wanted. Working for Greeley, she became aware of urban poverty and strengthened her commitment to social justice and to the causes that concerned her: prison reform, women’s suffrage; and educational and political equality for minorities. She engaged in benevolent work, visited prisons and mental asylums, immigrant slums, city hospitals and charitable institutions; talked with inmates. She expressed strong support for the abolitionist movement. She visited and wrote of Quaker Isaac Hopper’s halfway house for recently released prisoners and Eliza Farnham’s revolutionary program of self improvement for female inmates of Sing-Sing. She focused her attention, as she had not before, on specific social issues of the day, like capital punishment, the abolitionist movement, the war on Mexico, the horrific conditions in hospitals and prisons, and the treatment of madness. Her writing shows a distinct awareness of concrete conditions; far away from the abstract intellectualism of the Transcendentalists. Greeley wrote of her: “For every effort to limit vice, ignorance and misery, she had a ready, eager ear and a willing hand.” If she had had the money, “she would have had a house of refuge for all female outcasts.”


In 1846, she left for Europe as the first female foreign correspondent. Her reports from the Continent concern urban poverty in Manchester and Glasgow; penal reform; sweat labor; educational reform; and female self-improvement. She was unambiguously socialist. Fuller wrote “The people of American may look on and learn in time for a preventative wisdom the real meaning of the words Fraternity, Equality. Learn the needs of true democracy. Learn in time to reverence, learn to guard, the true aristocracy of a nation, the only true nobles, the laboring classes.”


Fuller settled in Rome in 1847 and became involved in the Italian Unification Movement. Her dispatches to the Tribune urged American support for the republican cause, and she and her new husband played an active role in the siege of Rome in 1849. The revolt failed. She and her husband and son left Italy and spent time on the continent with literary figures such as Carlyle and the then notorious French woman novelist George Sand. She supposedly was writing a history of the Italian Revolution.


Fuller’s story has a tragic ending. Returning to the States in 1850, the ship carrying her and her family struck a sandbar off Fire Island on June 1, less than 100 yards from shore. She, her husband and son drowned. Only her young son’s body was found and any manuscript she might have had with her was lost.



Truly, Fuller can serve as example for us, encouraging us to be aware of the social ills of our time and and dedicating ourselves to expose them, to suggest ways to eliminate them, and to work towards justice for all.

The Entangled (and Sometimes Violent) Web of Lamist Politics--April 18, 2010--Nick Gier

On March 21 Tibetans will celebrate the 51st anniversary of the Dalai Lama’s safe arrival in India, on March 10 they will commemorate the second anniversary of the killing of up to 70 monks and civilians and the jailing of thousands more Tibetan protesters. For these occasions I would like to share some of my research on the relation between Tibetan Buddhism and religious violence.

History demonstrates that there have been very few examples of nonviolent rule by religious leaders. Given the ethical tenets of the major religions one would expect higher levels of conduct on their part. The millions who rightly admire the current Dalai Lama would offer him as a glowing exception, and he is indeed a saint of nonviolence equal to Mahatma Gandhi. When the young Dalai Lama met Gandhi, he remarked afterwards: “I felt I was in the presence of a noble soul . . . a true disciple of Lord Buddha and a true believer in peace and harmony among all men.” If he could have lived to see the remarkable accomplishments of the Dalai Lama, I’m sure that Gandhi would have returned the favor.

In my book The Virtue of Non-Violence: from Gautama to Gandhi I give Gandhi’s ethics of nonviolence a Buddhist interpretation, and I also criticize Gandhi’s thought where I think he has gone wrong philosophically. Given what I have learned about Gandhi’s personality, I’m certain that he would have received my criticism with openness and charity, and I hope that my reservations about some of the Dalai Lama’s theological views are taken in the same way.

Many would make the assumption that Tibetan Buddhism has always produced saintly lamas who have followed the ethics of the Buddha. Sadly, this is not the case. Historian Hugh Richardson comments that the “rivalry and bitter fighting” among the monasteries “is a blot on the Tibetan Middle Ages.” Each of the monasteries had a “private army commanded often by a reliable family member of the original religious founder.” The general justification for this use of violence was same that some Christians and Muslims use: it is God’s will as found in prophetic oracles and religious texts.

Buddhist rule has always been more successful under civilian rather than religious rule. Many of the Buddhist kings in India, Cambodia, Sri Lanka, Thailand, and Bhutan were exemplary for their peaceful and enlightened leadership. It is supremely ironic that the most religiously tolerant rulers of Hindu India were the Buddhist Ashoka the Great and the Muslim Akbar the Great, and the best kings that Buddhists of Sri Lanka ever had were their Hindu kings from 1739 to 1815.

During a 3-week tour of Tibet and Bhutan in 1999, I learned that the Bhutanese had bravely defended themselves against nine Tibetan invasions in the 17th Century. The Bhutanese were followers of the Tantric Red Hat school of Tibetan Buddhism, and the Tibetans were committed to extending the rule of the Yellow Hat sect.

The first three invasions, however, were due to infighting among the Red Hats. My gracious Bhutanese hosts allowed me to assume that they were always the victims of religiously motivated violence, but my research has revealed that their most famous lama, Ngawang Namgyal, known simply as the Shabdrung, was ruthless in rooting out religious and political opposition to his absolute rule. He consulted both prophetic oracles and Buddhist scriptures to justify his actions.

In a famous 16-point proclamation the Shabdrung declared: “I am the incarnation prophesied by the patriarchs. I am the executioner of false incarnations.” The Shabdrung had sought refuge in Bhutan after a dispute arose about his right to be the incarnation of the Bodhisattva Chenrizi (Avalokiteshvara in Sanskrit). All the Dalai Lamas claim that they are also the incarnation of Chenrizi, so unfortunately we are confronted with something very familiar: armies appealing to the same deity for victory in war.

The Bodhisattva ideal is one of the greatest moral and spiritual achievements of Mahayana Buddhism. These enlightened Buddhas, beneficent laypeople in many instances, have exhausted their karmic debt, but nevertheless they chose to reenter the cycle of birth and death until all sentient beings are redeemed. Early Bodhisattvas such as the amazing Vimalakirti did perform miracles, but he did not have any grand plans for the destiny of India as Chenrizi does for Tibet. Bodhisattvas generally do not select their next incarnation with the purpose of extending their lives, particularly not as political rulers.

Bodhisattvas are like the Abrahamic deity in that they are persons with wills and emotional/mental lives, and they have a transcendent existence apart from time and space. (This belief applies to Mahayana Buddhism of which Tibetan Buddhism is a part.)

Buddhas and Bodhisattvas are significantly different from the Abrahamic God in that they are not creators of the cosmos (which is eternal) nor are they omnipotent. This may be the reason why the Dalai Lama, in his conversations with Thomas Laird in The Story of Tibet, says that Chenrizi’s plans for Tibet have failed on several occasions. The denial of omnipotence makes way, as it does in Christian “process” theology, for human freewill and responsibility, but the mechanics of this divine-human interaction are pretty much inscrutable in all the Mahayana works that I have read.

Also like the process deity, Bodhisattvas are not impassive and immutable. The early Church declared the doctrine of patripassianism--the view that God the Father suffered in the Crucifixion--heretical, but Alfred North Whitehead, modern father of process theology, stated that fellow sufferer

In the Pali scriptures (the Mahayana writings are in Sanskrit), Gautama Buddha calls himself a Bodhisattva in each of his previous lives, but uses the term Buddha to describe his last life as Prince Siddhartha. He describes these earlier lives as “when I was not fully awakened and still a Bodhisattva, being myself liable to birth” (Majjhima Nikaya 1.163.4). Although legends indicate that he knew he was a Buddha at birth, Gautama did not actually confirm this until his enlightenment at the age of 45. The implications here are rather momentous and most ironic: for Gautama Buddha the earlier Bodhisattvas, even though they are benevolent in every instance, are lesser beings because they are subject to rebirth. For Mahayana Buddhists, however, their Bodhisattvas are greater than Gautama, because they refused to enter Nirvana, which Gautama did, but choose to return to the world again and again until all beings are liberated.

An outside observer could say that this makes Gautama Buddha a rather selfish saint, but an insider could counter that the law of karma, over which the Buddha has no control, dictates that there can be no rebirth or any continued existence if a being has no karmic debt. In a longer version of this essay, I argue that the Mahayana Bodhisattva doctrine may very well undermine the law of karma. In that paper I also argue, just as I did in my book on Gandhi, that a Buddhist ethics of nonviolence is better served by the more robust view of the self found in the Pali writings. If the self and its suffering are ultimately illusory, as many Mahayana and Hindu philosophies claim, then there is no intelligible basis for personal agency or human rights.

Tibetan Buddhists believes that Chenrizi, starting with a monkey incarnation, has guided the people of Tibet throughout all of its fabulous prehistory and history. The Tibetan kings of prehistory were chosen according to procedures that appear to have an ancient Central Asian provenance. It is King Songzen Gampo (AD 605-49) for which we have the first good evidence, and he was held to be an incarnation of Chenrizi. There does not seem to be a break in Chenrizi’s guidance, so that means that Chenrizi is there for the reign of the anti-Buddhist king Langdharma as well as all the other less distinguished Tibetan rulers and lamas.

In his conversations with Laird, the Dalai Lama confirms the traditional view that Chenrizi has a “master plan,” and that he has chosen the Tibetan people to have a key role in that plan. (Those who object to my using the phrase “divine will” have to deal with the fact that plans and wills are inextricably linked.) The odd feature of this divine plan is that it has not been fulfilled on a number of key occasions, including the entire lives of the 6th through 12th Dalai Lamas. The failure of the 13th Dalai Lama’s efforts to modernize Tibet also went against Chenrizi’s plan. Again this may be due to human failure and not the less than omnipotent Bodhisattva.

Starting with the Third Dalai Lama (1543-1588), the Yellow Hat sect forged an alliance with Mongolia. Altan Khan declared that all his people had to join the Yellow Hat sect on pain of death, and his troops played a central role in subduing and marginalizing the Red Hat sects. As a result the Yellow Hat sect has dominated Tibetan politics and religion for the last 300 years.

To his credit the Fifth Dalai Lama, sometimes called “The Great Fifth” for his many achievements (including the construction of the 13-storey Potala Palace), confessed that he was not the right reincarnated child, and he reluctantly acceded to the use of military force that his advisors proposed. The Great Fifth actually practiced the sexual yoga of the Red Hat School and he was tolerant of all the Buddhist schools, even the indigenous Bon religion.

Tsangyang Gyatso, the Sixth Dalai Lama, was, to say the least, a controversial figure. He drank and made love to men and women to great excess, and, in a great act of defiance, he renounced his monastic vows. In response, the Manchu and Mongol leaders found another young man whom they claimed was the true Sixth, and Tsangyang Gyatso died mysteriously on his way to China.

The ultimate failure of reincarnation politics is clearly seen in the current situation. In 1989 came the death of the 10th Panchen Lama, considered second only to the Dalai Lama in spiritual significance. Considered a collaborator by most Tibetans, the 10th Panchen Lama was imprisoned for 13 years because the Chinese perceived that he was insufficiently loyal to the Communist cause. Just before his untimely (and some say suspicious death), he was speaking out against the government.

The current Dalai Lama commenced the traditional proceedings to find the correct child incarnation for the 11th Panchen Lama. When the selection was announced on May 14, 1995, the Beijing government arrested the young boy and placed him and his family under house arrest. The abbot who conducted the search was imprisoned for seven years and he is still under house arrest.

Using a selection procedure by which previous Chinese rulers had certified not only the 10th Panchen Lama, but also the 10th, 11th, 12th, and the 14th Dalai Lamas, the Communist government presented, on November 19, 1995, the young Gyeltsen Norbu as the true 11th Panchen Lama. His parents had of course been vetted by the Chinese Communist Party. In March of 2010 the Beijing government announced that their Panchen Lama, now 20 years old, is now among the 13 new members of the powerful National Committee of the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference.

It is therefore inevitable that upon the death of Dalai Lama, the Communists will ask Gyeltsen Norbu, as it is the Panchen Lama’s duty, to search for and choose the new Dalai Lama. The Tibetans in exile will no doubt find their own child as the true heir of the Yellow Hats, and unfortunately the controversy will drag on indefinitely.

In 1907 the British convinced the Bhutanese to set up a royal line to solve similar disputes in their reincarnation politics. (With DNA testing now available a true prince can always be correctly identified.) The Bhutanese kings of the 20th Century have proved to be some of the most enlightened royalty in Asia. King Jigme Singye Wangchuck became world famous for his motto “Gross National Happiness.” His green campaign has stopped forest products exports to India, banned motorcycle taxis, and eliminated plastic bags. The Bhutanese have enjoyed free education and health care for decades.

In 1934 Tibetan authorities blinded a well-meaning lama, who took four students to Europe and worked hard to modernize the country. In stark contrast, King Wangchuck sent his son to Harvard (he is now king), and he made English the language of instruction in all schools. Because they loved their kings so much, the Bhutanese very reluctantly voted in their first parliamentary elections in 2008.

The Dalai Lama says that if he returns to Tibet he will step down as head of state and continue his life as a “simple monk.” He also says that Chenrizi might choose a person in another country for his next reincarnation. Does that mean that Chenrizi has given up on Tibet as the nation best suited for the rule of reincarnated lamas? Even if so, what is to prevent the Beijing government from claiming that Chenrizi is embodied in its choice for Dalai Lama? It can claim a 290-year-old Chinese tradition of certifying a new Dalai Lama.

If Chenrizi does choose a different country, where is there a nation that would embrace that idea of a young Buddhist ruler? The only other majority Tibetan Buddhist areas are Ladakh and Sikkim and they are now part of India. Perhaps the Shabdrung was correct in claiming that Chenrizi had chosen him and Bhutan as the legitimate place of divine sovereignty.

In conversations with Thomas Laird, the Dalai Lama speculated that it was Chenrizi’s plan that the Great Fifth’s reincarnated successor be a king rather than a lama. By renouncing his vows, the Sixth Dalai Lama actually made this possible. This would have put an end to the impractical and unwise practice of choosing young children to rule a country.

With regard to the idea of a hereditary king for Tibet, why did Chenrizi choose such a poor candidate, and why did this divine plan fail? And why does the Dalai Lama imply that we would not have had the great benefit of his compassionate and charismatic leadership? Even more questions can be raised about the implications for basic Buddhist philosophy, and the relationship of this great Bodhisattva to the Tibetan people and the rest of the world.