this is what dr. nile gardner of the heritage foundation said this morning, speaking on the diane rehm show, at around 10:25 am.
in this context, he was criticizing kofi annan for too much pacifism during the past decade. specifically, he backed up his comments on the annan’s slow reaction to darfur.
i try to listen to information like this through the lens of a yogini (i love this article describing the word yogini. and this is a new book on the identity). to that end, my response is served up as yogically as possible, with a dash of feminism and a sprinkling of forgiveness.
many in the decades before us would have said that pacifism is the only way. though i wasn’t alive for it, the 60’s sounds like it was an encouraging time for peace-seekers. the teachings of the buddha, and gandhi, are rooted in non-violence. there have been voices, in other words, in the recent past that honor pacifism instead of criticize it.
to dr. gardiner’s point, these days we hear a lot about how violent things are. what i’m trying to work out is whether things are different or the same. one difference is that we have more access to the information (read: suffering) of people around the globe. and losing 3,000 people on 9/11 wasn’t a small experience. on the other hand, nick nolte says something to one of his reports in the thin red line about how nature is always warring with itself. car bombs in baghdad are of a piece, according to him, and obviously according to dr. gardiner.
so, here we find ourselves. if quantum physics is in fact a sound way to consider reality (this docu-drama does a great job explaining how), then when we meditate or do yoga, we are serving society by envisioning peace. watching the thin red line the other night, i wondered with the narrator what it is inside us that creates man-on-man violence–when there is so much beauty, and so much peace.
i posit, perhaps, that we need to know violence, really stare it in the face, before we can deeply know peace. and, as many wisdom teachers offer, to discover our true nature is to discover a reality beyond even the pedestrian definition of peace. rather, it is to know unadulterated bliss, that of true consciousness.
filed under: the boundless perspective, women and yoga, yoga and politics, yoga external, philosophy and religion
This entry was posted on Tuesday, December 12th, 2006 at 12:09 pm and is filed under the boundless perspective, women and yoga, yoga and politics, yoga external, philosophy and religion. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
December 12th, 2006 at 10:55 pm
I remember the scene in “The thin red line” where someone points to a tree and the vine growing on it, sucking out its nutrients, to illustrate how nature is full of predators and violence. [It is an indelible movie — kind of sticks in the deeper recesses of the mind]. I too wonder what is the best way to deal with the violence.
One good answer I heard at a reading of “veterans of war, veterans of peace” at Busboys and poets (just 2 blocks from boundless!) is this — We have had organized violence for as long as humans have lived. [In fact we inherit it from gorillas who also attack other gorillas in groups and murder them ruthlessly]. But organized non-violence has been around for only the past hundred years or so. So it will take time for it to take root in society and for peace to become the way of life — [don’t know who said this].
I have a lot of admiration for the quakers, the amish, the christian peacemakers (one of whom died in Iraq in the hands of his kidnappers), and of course Gandhi, Buddha, etc., While society will take its time to practice non-violence, I don’t see why we cannot start practicing it as individuals.
As for staring at violence in its face…well, it is all around us…no need to go looking for it
I believe peace, love, etc., spread in waves, just like the electromagnetic waves
When you practice it, it spreads to those around you and they in turn spread it further…
Finally, from a yogi or boddhisattva point of view…they are all different sides of the same coin. In our narrow view of our universe we tend to see things as good or bad, pleasant or unpleasant, etc., But from the higher perspective they are all part of the one [ as in “There is only one, not two” — the basic teaching of Advaita]
December 12th, 2006 at 11:00 pm
why violence? we’re all scared monkeys, and since there is no one in charge, it’s all a power struggle. why? because whoever is in power calls the shots. and if you’re the one in power, certain of a few things, it’s better than being the person on the bottom with no idea. of course, in the end, it’s all a crapshoot. no one person knows the real meaning, no one person can tell you what’s going on. so the louder voices tend to dominate the horizon (think right wing radio blowhards, for example). were we all to resign ourselves to just being civil, and agree that we will never know how things work out in the end, life would be much better. but such is not the case.
you may think the sixties were a peaceful time, but ask someone about the tet offensive, for example, or the riots in watts. and anyone who tries to tell you today we are more violent than in the past is unaware of general history - man has always been violent, just now you hear about stuff more. ask the spaniards about their holiday in mexico in the 16 & 1700’s, or better yet, ask the locals. oh wait, they’re all dead. as a matter of fact, ask the dead, all the dead, how violent we’ve all been, and you’ll see not much has changed in a few thousand years.
December 13th, 2006 at 11:20 pm
i don’t believe we are the agents of change in others or of the life on earth.
it has been my experience that the only way to truly create change is by changing the self. internally changing one’s perception of a person or group or situation or idea or place (like mother earth herself) - when changed on an internal level - *magically* transforms the person/object/idea being contemplated. good, bad or indifferent - the transformation was within me - not the person/object/idea externally.
dr. gardner sees annan as weak because this is his internal interpretation of the man & logically it is the picture he has painted in his mind’s eye of annan. in contrast, i perceive annan as a man of great compassion, kindness & intelligence. dr. gardner made a choice to create his annan & i made a choice to create mine.
i believe annan is attempting to achieve noble feats within a human-made organization of human-made laws & hidden agendas. obstacles which i feel are very similar to the challenges one might encounter in their favorite virtual game. learning to effectively play the game, in order to proceed higher & higher, takes time, increased learning, grace & cunning - perhaps many lifetimes to get it right or to make the journey easier or even uneccesary.
this is how i view human evolution. earth is a virtual game in which we have entered precisely so that we may experience all the various possibilities which one can. this is god’s wish - to experience the full gamut of the human experience.
from the limited human perspective it’s easy to get lost in earthly conditions & lament what we call “the injustices” of “famine”, “war”, “death”, disease” & “murder”. could it not be that in truth these souls who have died have departed because they were ready for the next level? regardless if they were the “victim” of a suicide bomber or the bomber themselves? without judas there is no jesus.
raised as a christian i was often confused as to why so many christians hate judas? i always felt that judas was no different than jesus & that judas deserved just as much adoration & love as jesus. this was not received with much happiness in my sunday school class. ever since then i’ve been trying to understand the nature of holiness/goodness as opposed to evil. and i still come to the same conclusion: there isn’t a difference. both are quite frequently trying to achieve the same aim from a different angle. i feel there must be a kind of “agreement” between the 2. like a divine “god cop/bad cop” scenario being played out.
we humans have difficulty understanding this because we tend to focus on the physical nature of the departure. and we naturally take sides & cry & shout that it “isn’t fair!” if it was “violent”, then we think “bad” & “unjust”. if it was “natural” then we’ve trained ourselves to believe it was “peaceful” & are apt to be more accepting about it (usually).
the truth is that nature is violent & unfair - so violence & unjustness are natural - neither good nor bad; they just are.
a question i like to ask my humanitarian anti-war pro-life friends is this: what is the difference between a child who has died due to the ramifications of war as opposed to a child being aborted? imho - none.
if what many gurus & great philosophers in various cultures & throughout time have taught is true than the accepted human perception of duality: life/death; good/bad; black/white; male/female etc…is an illusion then so too is peace & war; sacred & profane; saint & sinner.
in addition to this, in many metaphysic schools of thought the belief is that we are not sparks of god but wholly god & that because god wishes to experience all aspects of human/earthly existence - which would also include what we humans categorize as war, depravity, murder, disease, suffering, exploitation, greed, lust, poverty, arrogance, narcissism, violence, bloodthirstiness, envy & all the other things which most sound-minded humans interpret as negative - it is purely because this is exactly what god desires.
and it is specifically through our incarnation on earth that this desire is manifested. god wants to do, see, feel, taste, see & know it all; the good, the bad, the beautiful & the ugly. we are the vessels or limbs of god experiencing the experience. it is just as much about our creating these dramas (consciously or unconsciously) as it is about our response to them which makes the human experience so beautiful, tragic, logical, confusing & everything else under the sun.
who we truly are; where we came from; and where we are right now & where we are heading - is all so much more fantastic, special & supremely powerful than i believe we can ever imagine, or be capable of understanding at this level.
like a sleepy weaver, fashioning a tapestry, we tend to focus on the one little spot we are weaving - but there is such a far more wondrous beautiful fantastic cosmic kaleidoscope drama being unveiled made up of colors, languages & thought-forms which our human brains cannot fathom all at once without our being labeled schizophrenic or psychotic. this glorious scene is constantly unfolding & spiralling & revealing itself to us forever & ever more with every new level we graduate to.
as far as the 1960’s? i think bob dylan may have perfectly described the era when he said something like, it was just one big fashion statement.
December 14th, 2006 at 10:48 am
Kim – as always, your posts have me digging deep inside my own mind. Thank you!
You are right that we live in a very dangerous world. Strictly speaking, IMHO, it’s the pervasive suffering Buddha spoke about in his first sermon 2,500 years ago, magnified by technology (guns, bombs and the ability to spread fear through mass media). This is very frustrating for me personally, because I want to be part of a world where each of us lives up to our full potential. Not to get too John Lennon on you, but can you imagine?
So do we need to stare violence in the face to know peace? Or do we need to sit and look at the source of our own emotions in order to develop the compassion necessary to deal not with just our co-workers, but with the rest of the planet? I think both concepts are one in the same – we all come from the same source, we all have the same set of emotions (to varying degrees).
If a few of us can genuinely radiate peace and compassion into the world, the time will eventually come that one random act of kindness will have a domino effect and change the entire planet.
March 23rd, 2007 at 9:36 am
Whether the world is extremely dangerous or not depends on who you think you are. I think I am life itself and life is continuing to live on life as it always has. The food I eat today which is in the process of becoming “me” right now was a few days ago part of a living animal and before that a plant and before that soil which mixed with water and sunlight. All of this life is living through me and in me. Of what should I be afraid? I am life itself.
March 26th, 2007 at 8:53 am
is there fear in life? if so, to what extent do we experience it, know it? to what end?