Background:

The Buddha of the Dead Sea is about a fictitious holy man who lives alone in a Lotus flower-shaped houseboat in the middle of the Dead Sea. He is on a widely-known, non-stop praying mission to convert the Dead Sea to a Living Sea of fresh water, and thereby convert the whole of the Middle East to a Buddha land.

Thesis: The only way to achieve peace in the Middle East is to debunk the Abrahamic faiths by showing the power of the Buddha Way.

Invitation to you:

I would love to see a play or a movie based on this concept, for which I claim original visionary credit. However, the writing of plays or of movies is beyond the scope of my abilities. Therefore, I invite you to do the writing, and to feel free to use any of the following ideas I've listed.

Naturally, any and all rights would belong to you. As for my own reward: Just knowing I'd inspired you would be more than enough.

A Sketch of the Lead Actors

The Dead Sea itself:

There are aspects of the Dead Sea which would serve well to describe the Middle East. These can also serve to compare Abrahamic to Buddhistic notions of life and death:

• Its shores are the lowest areas of land on earth, at over 1,300 feet below sea level. So, like the Middle East, the Dead Sea is in a "low" way, its waters (a symbol of life) dead-ended with nowhere to go.

• The small size of the Dead Sea makes it an ideal and intimate stage upon which this story is played out. Were it too large, the Buddha of the Dead Sea wouldn't loom that large himself.

• Water, by virtue of entering the Dead Sea, "dies" (that is, loses its potential) by having to remain in that body. Such water could be reincarnated (or come back to life, as it were) only after it leaves the Sea by evaporating and then falling elsewhere as life-giving rain.

• The Dead Sea is one of the world's saltiest (deadest) bodies of waters. It is becoming even "deader" by having its fresh, incoming waters diverted for human and agricultural use. There is a real danger that this icon could disappear entirely and, even though "dead," end up wreaking environmental havoc (causing more death, quite literally) due to its absence. [It's interesting how the dead support the living.]

• There are plans, in the exploratory phase only, to dig a canal connecting the Red Sea to the Dead Sea, in hopes of raising its level. This project would also provide hydroelectric power as the Red Sea waters power turbines by means of the power of their downward flow toward the Dead Sea. This same downward pressure could be used in a Reverse Osmosis process to provide fresh drinking water, though the downside to that is the salts that are filtered out would be flushed into the Dead Sea.

• The Bible speaks prophetically of the Dead Sea healing and becoming a body of fresh water, with fish living in it some day (Ezekiel 47). However, the way in which it becomes a Living Sea is by means of an ironic Buddhist fulfillment of this prophecy, which serves as the climax of my story.

The Dead Sea Buddha himself:

This is the main character in my story - a true mystery man unknown by anybody, with no traceable history. Referring to himself simply as the Buddha of the Dead Sea, he lacks even a name, birth certificate, or any documentation that he even exists. Furthermore, he denies that he is a citizen of any country. Complicating matters for any who would try to discern his origins, he speaks several languages fluently.

He encounters no objections from Israeli or Jordanian authorities when he asks permission to live in solitude in the middle of the Dead Sea on a floating houseboat (described below). His wealth, in the form of gold of uncertain origin, suffices to build this houseboat and to arrange for supplies to be flown in occasionally via seaplane.

The Lotus

The Lotus is the name of the houseboat, which is the Buddha's dwelling. The flowering plant known as the lotus is a significant symbol among Nichiren Buddhists, with whom I am personally connected.

This plant, lovely to behold as it floats serenely on the surface of a pond, actually draws its nourishment via a root feeding off the muck on the bottom. Comparing it to a human being, the flower represents the potential all of us have to manifest the "bloom" of Buddhahood - even though we are connected to and nourished by muck (that is, by our earthly desires).

Also, the Lotus is a symbol of an important concept in Mahayana Buddhism - the simultaneity of cause and effect. The fact that the Lotus is the only plant that flowers and seeds at the same time, is interpreted symbolically as meaning:

When a person takes appropriate action (creating a cause) leading toward enlightenment, there is an immediate (though subtle, internal) effect which is a manifestation of this enlightenment. That's what's meant by "the simultaneity of cause and effect," which refutes the notion that any possible manifestation of effect takes place much later.

Two dedicated disciples of this Buddha

These two provide logistical support for Dead Sea Buddha, arranging for occasional deliveries of supplies he needs. These two are also unknown, untraceable mystery men but they are unique and provocative in their appearance. They'd dyed their skin and hair saffron (a traditional Buddhist color), and wear saffron-colored clothes. However, one wears his hair and clothes in the style of a Hasidic Jew; the other of an (Islamic) Whirling Dervish.

All appearances are just that - only appearances - as the "dervish" states, "Before becoming a Buddhist, I was a Jew," and the Hasidim states, "Before becoming a Buddhist, I was a Muslim." Both men, however, are inseparably close friends, explaining to people, "In a past life, we were brothers."

The authorities

Toward the end of this story, there is a scene on the Lotus, featuring a confrontation between this Buddha and men (it's always men, isn't it?) who represent the interests of the locals. Four are from the Israeli side, and four are from the Islamic side - each group having one member from the clerical side.

The Buddha makes an offer to these men, after performing a miracle in their presence. This offer is the dramatic high point of this piece.

The Setting:

In the near future, at the time when the Red Sea to Dead Sea Canal is nearing completion, the Buddha of the Dead Sea invites the eight men (referred to, above) to receive a gift from him. He had already sent them a plan, of his own creation, detailing a revolutionary new technology for desalination of the waters about to flow in from the Red Sea. He is able to lure them to the Lotus by promising something even more profound, but only to be bestowed on board the Lotus.

The climax

It is late in the evening when the eight men of authority board the Lotus to meet the Buddha and receive his gift. After pleasantries are exchanged, the Buddha gives each of his guests a large cup and instructs them to dip it into the Dead Sea and drink the water.

The eight look at each other, and one finally says, "You know we can't drink that water - unless ... unless these cups are designed to make fresh water out of salty."

The Buddha says that these are just cups to hold water, not to change it. But he also says, "Go ahead and drink anyway. If you are not sure, then take only a small sip."

The guests do as instructed and are amazed to be drinking fresh water. Then the Buddha's two disciples, witnessing this from nearby, look at each other, nod in agreement, and then take a running leap into the (now) Living Sea, letting out a hearty "Yee-ha!" before disappearing below the waves.

When they surface, one yells out, "Look! I can swallow this in good health!" Another one fumbles with his hands and yanks something to the surface, "Look! A fish! For the first time in 2,000 years, a fish lives in the Dead Sea!"

Later, when pressed for an explanation, the Buddha tells these authorities that he just now made the entire Dead Sea into a body of fresh water - "no more salt!" And he adds: "If you have any doubt about the power of a Buddha to perform this kind of miracle, then you have much to learn about Buddhism."

But there's a catch:

The Buddha informs his guests that this now-living sea won't stay that way, unless each of the eight agrees - before dawn - that it should. Even one dissenter would be enough to cause the Dead Sea to return to its past, hostile state. Then he says, "I'm leaving you now to talk this over. In your wisdom or perhaps in your foolishness, you might decide the sea was better off dead. You might decide the prospect of a Living Sea to be detrimental somehow, even though it would allow the entire surrounding areas to come to life."

Before he leaves the room, the Buddha looks at one of the eight (Muslim or Jew, I will not say) and beckons him, "Come outside with me, I need a word with you in private."

When alone, the Buddha says, "I know you're a suicide bomber. Tell me, are you surprised the bomb didn't go off when tried to detonate it shortly after you arrived here? Don't be surprised - I rendered it harmless."

[It turns out the bomb is in this guest's artificial leg.]

The Buddha concludes: "I especially wanted you to be here, because of the special challenge you represent. You think I'm some kind of demon, since you can't think outside the limits of your own faith. But what I said still goes. If you are the only one to decide that this sea must not live, then it shall not. Of course, if it does live, that will stand as proof of the power of Buddhism, since the whole world knows I've been praying to convert the Dead Sea for years, from my home here on the Lotus."

One additional detail:

In the closing scene, the Buddha gives the suicide bomber a special gift - the artificial limb is transformed into his own original flesh and blood. The wannabe bomber is overwhelmed by joy at his sudden conversion, but he's still torn by his deep-seated doubts about the Buddha.

The benefactor looks at this man and says, "If you or any of the others decide the Dead Sea shall not live, then your leg will become as it was before - artificial and containing a bomb. But I promise you this, that bomb will not explode.

"You have a lot to think about - before the sun rises."

An Unconventional Buddha
I

QUOTE [with paraphrase underlined]:

If the form of a Buddha will bring salvation, he immediately manifests a Buddha form and preaches the Law. If the form of an asshole will bring salvation, he immediately becomes an asshole and preaches the Law. Thus he manifests himself in various different forms, depending upon what is appropriate for salvation.

:UNQUOTE [Lotus Sutra, Burton Watson translation, page 296]

Steven Searle (was) candidate for U.S. President in 2008

"We need a fresh approach to quenching the fires of hatred in the Middle East. Maybe what is needed is a nice cool drink of water from an unexpected source" - Steve.

The Best Party Available

Contact me: bpa_cinc@yahoo.com

Open Invitation: I hereby waive all copyright protection for any material I've posted on Zaadz/Gaia with these exceptions: I reserve the right to disseminate this material, claim authorship credit for it and any compensation I can negotiate. However, if anyone wishes to use these essays, they are free to do so. I do not require that advance permission be obtained, that I be paid any royalties, or that I receive author's credit or even be notified of intent to use. I truly want anyone "out there" to feel free to use these essays, in original or modified form, for whatever purposes they deem worthy.

Thesis:

High tech gadgetry doesn't seem to matter to Buddhists. And for good reason.

A most curious matter:

My source for what follows is the highest of Shakyamuni Buddha's teachings, The Lotus Sutra*. The Lotus is replete with references appropriate to ancient times, especially to a non-mechanized, agrarian society. I wondered, though, if the Lotus (which is supposed to be older than the known age of the universe) has any references to high tech. Since it speaks of other countries far beyond earth having existed for millions of years, it would seem to make sense that these lands had at least acquired our level of machination.

Yet the Lotus says almost nothing of these technologies.

I said, "almost nothing." Consider this, from the Lotus's Chapter 7:

QUOTE [page 122]:

[Shakyamuni] Buddha announced to the monks: "When the Buddha Great Universal Wisdom Excellence [GUWE] attained [Enlightenment], five hundred ten thousand million Buddha worlds in each of the ten directions trembled and shook in six different ways...

"...a great light shone everywhere, completely filling the worlds and surpassing the light of the heavens...At that time in five hundred ten thousand millions lands in the eastern direction the Brahma palaces shone with a brilliant light that was twice its ordinary brightness, and the Brahma kings each thought to himself, Now the brilliance of the palace is greater than ever in the past...

At that time [these] Brahma kings... accompanied by their palaces [my emphasis - Steve] ...journeyed together to the western region .... They saw the Great Universal Wisdom Excellence Thus Come One in the place of practice...

"...each [king] took his palace and presented it to the Buddha, speaking these words [in unison!]: ‘...We beg you to accept and occupy these palaces that we present.'"

:UNQUOTE.

My interpretation

I believe these kings used their (mobile) palaces as traveling machines to visit that Buddha (GUWE Thus Come One). Furthermore, considering how far these kings had to travel, there's no doubt in my mind that these traveling machines operated using the highest principles of technology. They were able to convey these kings quickly and without regard to the kinds of limitations which we endure - for instance, that it's not possible to travel faster than the speed of light.
[Well, it isn't possible to travel faster, but it is possible to travel better.]

I believe that such a high technology exists, though it had no attraction to those who'd possessed it. This is evident by the fact that these kings were offering their palaces to the BUWE Buddha, which would leave them no way to get home! Correction: "...with no tech vehicle to get home!"). They had no intention of going home, at least not right away. They implored the Buddha to enlighten them by means of what is (ironically enough) called the Great Vehicle Law.

Once they were to attain Buddhahood by practicing this Law, then they would be able to travel back home - without means of their palatial vehicles. One of the powers of a Buddha is to be able to travel anywhere - at will. More than that: To be in several distant places at the same time.

With that kind of Enlightened power, who needs technology?

Steven Searle (was) candidate for U.S. President in 2008

"Technology is way overrated. I mean, did the proliferation of word processors make people better writers?"  - Steve.

The Best Party Available

* The Lotus Sutra, as translated by Burton Watson.

Contact me: bpa_cinc@yahoo.com

Open Invitation: I hereby waive all copyright protection for any material I've posted on Zaadz/Gaia with these exceptions: I reserve the right to disseminate this material, claim authorship credit for it and any compensation I can negotiate. However, if anyone wishes to use these essays, they are free to do so. I do not require that advance permission be obtained, that I be paid any royalties, or that I receive author's credit or even be notified of intent to use. I truly want anyone "out there" to feel free to use these essays, in original or modified form, for whatever purposes they deem worthy.

From now on, I will refer to our new president as Blacque Obammer. My strategic reason: People might react negatively, but (hopefully) they'll read on, even if only for a sentence or two.

And that's all I'll need to stimulate thought and to propose my own counter-measures.

What's in a name: Genesis of Blacque Obammer

As for the first name:

When creating this pun, I was going to go with Black, since I wanted to focus on his race. Front and center: his race. Why? Well, ask the question another way: Why did such large numbers of voters focus on precisely that aspect during the Democratic primary? This is exactly what they did, for can you imagine a similarly unknown white man with such a thin resume and lack of experience having won the nomination?

So, admit it or not, race was an important factor among his supporters. So I decided to keep that focus there, more or less as a reminder as to what it is about BO that had attracted national attention in the first place.

But...I didn't go with Black (too simple, too obvious). I wanted something a bit more elegant, while still connecting to race. Our new president is elegant, perhaps even a bit aristocratic in his bearing. Which is good, since that beats the hell out of the Neanderthals we've suffered with for the last eight years. So I decided: "Blacque it is!"

I wanted to infuse extra meaning, so I created an acronym:

B is for "Barack-ratic" - a pun on the word "bureaucratic" as a reference to what will prove to be Obammer's preferred style of governance - by bureaucracy. This is an improvement over Bush's style, but I believe Blacque will carry it to an extreme.

L is for "Leader:" I put the word leader in quotation marks. If our new president actually leads, rather than panders or postures, then I'll remove the quotes.

A is for artful...and not in the good sense of that word.

C is for co-opter (of)

Q is for Qualified

U is for underlings'

E is for expertise

All together, Blacque makes for an interesting, perhaps prophetic description of our new president:

Barack-ratic Leader: Artful co-opter of qualified underlings' expertise

As for the last name:

The bammer (that is, the one who bams) I had in mind was Rahm Emanuel. Bam has several definitions* which I feel apply quite well to Rahm-bo:

• "an imposition; a cheat; a hoax" - derived from bamboozle

• "to cheat; to wheedle"

• "imitative of the sound of a hard hit" [Rahm could easily be considered a hard hitter.]

When our new president needs a hard hitter, I can see Blacque calling out to Rahm: "Oh, Bammer! I could use your discreet touch here." Therefore, I dub the one who would call out "Oh, Bammer!" to be none other than Blacque Obammer himself.

Why bother?

Did I just now waste a lot of effort just to create an elaborate pun? Not really, for I feel that words have great power. And these two words - Blacque Obammer -  might actually lead people to think (many for the first time): "What have we gotten ourselves into?" If I can do that much, then I will consider my efforts to have been worthwhile.

Steven Searle for U.S. President in 2008

"What's in a name? Well, that all depends on the name, the context, and how carefully it's contemplated. But please, make no mistake: There can be much in a name"  - Steve.

The Best Party Available

* source of bam definitions: http://dictionary.reference.com/

Contact me: bpa_cinc@yahoo.com

Open Invitation: I hereby waive all copyright protection for any material I've posted on Zaadz/Gaia with these exceptions: I reserve the right to disseminate this material, claim authorship credit for it and any compensation I can negotiate. However, if anyone wishes to use these essays, they are free to do so. I do not require that advance permission be obtained, that I be paid any royalties, or that I receive author's credit or even be notified of intent to use. I truly want anyone "out there" to feel free to use these essays, in original or modified form, for whatever purposes they deem worthy.

Back in 2004, Osama bin Laden said the goal of al Qaeda is to force America into bankruptcy.

I want to be very clear about two points: If the US ends up collapsing into bankruptcy:

• al Qaeda will claim at least partial credit (and rightly so)

• the majority of the blame, however, will reside within our own borders: We did it to ourselves.

How we did it to ourselves:

By being on auto pilot and refusing to think things through.

By allowing ourselves to be distracted by chicken hawks squawking about terrorists hiding under every bed.

By assuming our government regulators were on the job, carefully watching the foxes.

By refusing to elect independents to office, always robotically "choosing" between the Dems and the Pubs ["Will you choose fries or onion rings with your burger, sir?" - either way, you still get a burger.]

By voting for Change You Can Believe In, without asking for specifics (sorry, too late now).

By thinking we can print more paper money and spend our way out of any economic crisis.

By means of dubious appointments by the president-elect which are meant to please the financial industry, as in this case:

QUOTE:

Nine years ago, Gary Gensler played a central role in fending off tough regulation for exotic financial instruments for hedging against risk. On Thursday, President-elect Barack Obama picked him for a central role in cleaning up the wreckage that some of those instruments caused....

...Mr. Gensler could not be reached for comment about how his views about financial regulation have evolved.

:UNQUOTE [source: New York Times, 12/19/08]

Who knows? Maybe Mr. Gensler learned his lesson, changed his evil ways, or conned his way into this job. In any event, I find it fascinating that he "could not be reached for comment," given that our new president had just elevated him to this critical position: Head of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission.

Introducing the New, Improved Military Draft

President-elect Blacque* Obammer's team is preparing a $1 trillion economic recovery package. Of course, this will please al Qaeda immensely. They know the age-old rule: "The quickest way to bankruptcy is to pile on as much debt as possible."

Though that's bad enough, don't be distracted. Take time out to pay careful attention to what he'll say and do concerning our military preparedness. [And what he'll be trying to lead up to.] Without a doubt, he'll ramp up military spending to keep the generals and contractors happy. But worse than that: I believe he will (within six months) make a shocking announcement proposing that mandatory military conscription once again be the law of the land. And this time, there won't be any deferments for those who are enrolled in college nor will females be exempt except perhaps from combat duty.

Obammer will say something like, "After careful consideration and lengthy conferral with our top military leaders, I am forced to conclude that a reinstitution of universal compulsory military service is in the vital national interest." [Hey, better to hear bad news from a friend, right?]

Of course, many of Blacque's supporters at MoveOn and Daily Kos will gnash their teeth and wail, but what can they possibly do? Support Obammer's GOP opponent in the next election? That aint gonna happen. So once again, the progressives will be left out in the cold, once their darling consolidates his power and seeks to broaden his base. [To their credit, though, some among them actually saw this coming.]

The sad thing: A broad cross-section of the country will go along with a draft because of a belief that conscripting young people in a time of economic downturn is a convenient way to thin out the labor pool.

The sadder thing: Once we have a draft, some people will remember me and this promise I'd made before the election:

EIGHT:          There will be no military draft during my presidency. If Congress enacts a draft, however, I will encourage all draftees to be inducted. Immediately after induction, though, they will be subject to this blanket order: Do not follow any orders from any member of the military except this order from me, your Commander in Chief: "Carry on with your civilian lives as if you had never been drafted."

source:

http://bpa-cinc.gaia.com/blog/2008/9/the_electoral_contract_of_steven_searle_for_us_president

The context of EIGHT (above): this was the 8^th in a list of 47 promises I guaranteed to keep "if elected." I was the only candidate for the presidency in 2008 who had even mentioned the draft during the campaign. [Though, to be sure, it was very much on the minds of all of my opponents.]

In fact, I was the only presidential candidate to ever offer a written contract as an inducement for votes. So it could be said: While Blacque Obammer made history in one way, I made history in quite another. And since history is still being written, I have no doubt as to my contribution eventually being seen as the more profound.

Steven Searle for U.S. President in 2008

The Best Party Available

* "There is a reason I'm calling him Blacque Obammer, which I'll address fairly soon"  - Steve.

Contact me: bpa_cinc@yahoo.com

Open Invitation: I hereby waive all copyright protection for any material I've posted on Zaadz/Gaia with these exceptions: I reserve the right to disseminate this material, claim authorship credit for it and any compensation I can negotiate. However, if anyone wishes to use these essays, they are free to do so. I do not require that advance permission be obtained, that I be paid any royalties, or that I receive author's credit or even be notified of intent to use. I truly want anyone "out there" to feel free to use these essays, in original or modified form, for whatever purposes they deem worthy.

TO: Those familiar with the case

If Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich should ever go on trial based on wiretap evidence, he should employ the April Fool's defense. Blago could say to the jury:

"Look, it was common knowledge for several years that the feds were investigating me. Of course I knew that. What? You don't think I read the funny papers?

"Since I'm a lawyer by profession, I also knew it was highly likely that my phones would be tapped. I would have been amazed if they hadn't been. So I'm saying, I knew the feds were listening in when I said all that stuff. Who on this jury could possibly believe I had thought they weren't listening?

"The only thing I didn't say, for the benefit of the eavesdropping feds, was ‘April Fool!' But I might as well have, since in context it was clear that that was my intent. That's what I was saying all that stuff for - as a big April Fool's joke. I was just jerking their chains, those f***ing toilets!

"My way of saying, ‘I know you're out there!'

"Who could believe I was speaking without being fully aware that I was being wiretapped?"

There it is: The April Fool's Defense (in other words, I didn't mean what I'd said and no reasonable person could possibly think otherwise).

Tell you what: If I was sitting on that jury and the feds had no other evidence to present, I would vote to acquit the man. And I would morally support his follow-up lawsuit charging false arrest and defamation of character.

Brief Background

Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich has been charged by the feds with a litany of wrongdoing, based on wiretap evidence. He hasn't (yet) been indicted. Nor has he been brought up on any state charges. And he hasn't tried to explain anything (at least, not publicly), which is wise since those words might end up being used against him in a court of law.

Innocent until proven guilty

In this country, a person is innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. However, President-elect Blacque Obammer didn't care whether Blago was guilty or innocent, waiting only one day after his arrest to urge him to resign. Obammer was apparently concerned about Illinois' ability to govern itself with a chief executive under fire. I wonder if Mr. Change You Can Believe In will offer his opinion should other governors from other states also come under fire.

That's what presidents do, right? They pass pre-judgments on governors. [hmm...]

[Blago hasn't even been indicted yet.]

A BO mouthpiece (one Robert Gibbs) was quite right when he said, "...it is difficult for the governor to effectively do his job and serve the people of Illinois." However, that is not sufficient reason to urge him to resign. Frankly, that's none of Obammer's business. Our new president seems to be like so many before him, who want to put messy situations behind them (especially those from his own home state).

[What, no indictment?]

Lisa Madigan, Illinois Attorney General seems to also want to expedite this matter so that we can move on (they love to move on, don't they?). Lisa has asked the Illinois State Supreme Court to undo the results of the election which put Blago in power. According to the Chicago Tribune (12/12/08):

"Madigan said she is asking the court to intervene because it would be quicker than impeachment."

Ah, so that's it, eh? It's the speed of the matter which is paramount, yes?

[Again, no indictment.]

Madigan herself, according to widely held belief, covets election to the governorship someday. So she could find it quite convenient if the Illinois high court got rid of Blago for her. Small problem: According to page 9 of her motion before the court:

QUOTE:

This Court should declare that Mr. Blagojevich is currently disabled from serving as Governor. Under the Illinois Constitution, the Governor shall be replaced by a successor if he "is unable to serve because of death, conviction on impeachment, failure to qualify, resignation or other disability."

:UNQUOTE.

Madigan conveniently overlooks the fact that Blago is quite able to serve, unless she's trying to sell the court this bill of goods:

"He's unable to serve because the Illinois lawmakers he has to deal with would hold allegations against people to be factual (especially, allegations without indictments). Blago is unable to serve because those low lifes would accept at face value unproven charges (libel? slander?) as truth, and will choose to ostracize the governor instead of granting him his day in court, or the benefit of an impeachment trial."

The high court should strictly reprimand Madigan for wasting taxpayer's money on trying to foist off such a frivolous, meritless motion on the court.

Shame!

But the court won't publicly embarrass Lisa Madigan because she's the daughter of Michael Madigan, Speaker of the Illinois House of Representatives. How do you think Lisa attained her political prominence? Connections! And yet she thinks not only to pass judgment on Rod Blagojevich, but to use her position to get the Illinois Supreme Court involved. [Talk about using one's position for one's own personal gain!]

[And still, no indictment.]

Conclusion:

Just because we have the best democracy that money can buy, that doesn't mean we have the best possible democracy - or really any democracy at all.

Steven Searle

Losing candidate for US President in 2008

"Maybe with the heat on Blagojevich, the feds can get Tony Rezko (or others) to rat out Chicago's mayor Richard M. Daley. I would love to see duh mare being forced to do the perp walk" - Steve.

Founder of The Best Party Available

Contact me: bpa_cinc@yahoo.com

Open Invitation: I hereby waive all copyright protection for any material I've posted on Zaadz/Gaia with these exceptions: I reserve the right to disseminate this material, claim authorship credit for it and any compensation I can negotiate. However, if anyone wishes to use these essays, they are free to do so. I do not require that advance permission be obtained, that I be paid any royalties, or that I receive author's credit or even be notified of intent to use. I truly want anyone "out there" to feel free to use these essays, in original or modified form, for whatever purposes they deem worthy.

Depends on who you ask...

Christians

If you ask a Christian about the purpose of our lives, he'd say, "To live as sinlessly as possible, to ask for forgiveness when we sin, and to accept the Savior into our lives in order to gain entrance to heaven." Ah, heaven. So that's it, eh? The purpose of our lives is to seek some type of reward which is payable after our lives are over. Our lives are a means to an end, which can only be obtained when we're dead? Are we so desperate to be rid of our aches, pains, and uncertainties (especially our uncertainties) that we build a place in our minds called "heaven" and aim for that?

Is there a downside to Heaven itself, once we make it that far? I don't think the holy rollers have thought this one out very carefully: What would it be like once we're There. For one thing, the structure of our consciousness would have to change. Once we've lived a life based on a 24-hour "day," which is the basis of a 70-year succession of such days, we'd go nuts once we're thrust, with no preparation whatsoever, into an infinite existence where such days are meaningless. I mean, what could occupy our minds - and this I especially ask of those whose minds are forever occupied with petty, trivial things.

After a few millions years of playing harps, singing celestial songs, walking streets of gold, and hanging around with boring, straight-laced goody-goodies, we might long for the stimulation of the Lake of Fire. In short, I think we'd become bored of heaven.

Buddhists

I'm not going to pretend that I know how Buddhists define life's purpose. But...I will tell you what this Buddhist thinks.

In a nutshell, the purpose of our lives is to become fully-enlightened Buddhas, who in turn have a purpose of helping others become fully-enlightened Buddhas. This might sound like nothing more than a glorified pyramid scheme, but maybe that's what reality is. [Note: In a closed system, pyramid schemes can't work; but in an open system...that's another story.]

The critical question becomes: If everybody in the universe becomes a Buddha, would that mean that life would no longer have any purpose?

Exactly, but to understand that calls for a bit of background.

A bit of background

In the earlier teachings of Shakymuni Buddha, it was believed that being reincarnated was a bad thing. The purpose of religious practice was to atone for the sins of past lives, thereby making it unnecessary to be reborn into this physical world of hardship. The Buddha himself didn't have to be reborn, but he chose to out of his great compassion to lead others to Enlightenment. If there were no others to lead (that is, if everyone was already a Buddha), it would not be necessary to be reborn into the physical world.

What other world is there? There was an Enlightened One named Void King Buddha, whose name helps answer that question. The ultimate goal of Buddhist practice is to become Nothing (King of the Void) - or (put another way) to become extinguished. I'll put this in modern terms: "The universe consists mostly of empty space, which even pervades and makes up most of physical entities. If one can become nothing and, by virtue of that becoming, become part of the great pervasive universal nothingness, then one can be everywhere at once. Then we would no longer be confined to a mere existence in one physical location, having only one physical body."

There is far more of nothingness (void) than of everything else. But here we have to be careful with what we mean by void. I can only hint at that by recalling wise words I'd once heard: "One of the biggest mistakes we make as human beings is to assume that what we mean by ‘mind' is encompassed only within the confines of our craniums."

Why we need not worry

We don't have to worry about becoming Buddhas only to find out we don't have anyone left to lead to Enlightenment. All Buddhas have the power to create an infinite number of emanations of themselves, in order to be able to preach salvation (simultaneously) on any of the infinite worlds in the 10 directions. These emanation Buddhas are constantly hard at work throughout the universe, yet they still have so much work of conversion and teaching on their hands. So we don't have to worry about running out of souls to save once we've attained Buddhahood.

The attainment of Buddhahood is both a path and a final destination. And it is the joy of the law which sustains our efforts, and in fact propels them, as we tread this path and finally arrive at our destination.

Though Shakyamuni Buddha has a life span which far exceeds the known age of the universe (so much for the Big Bang theory), he did not tire of his pursuit nor become bored once attaining his goal. It is inherent in the nature of the law of enlightenment that we don't tire, but instead are energized by our practice. That's fortunate, in light of what the Buddha said [page 231, Lotus Sutra, the Burton Watson translation]:

"This life span of countless kalpas I gained as the result of lengthy practice. You who are possessed of wisdom, entertain no doubts on this point! Cast them off, end them forever..."

To me, those are among the strictest words he used in the entire teaching called the Lotus Sutra.

However, he quickly follows with these words of encouragement:

"Though in fact alive, he [the Buddha] gives out word he is dead, yet no one can say he speaks falsely. I am the father of this world, saving those who suffer and are afflicted. Because of the befuddlement of ordinary people, though I live, I give out word I have entered extinction. For if they see me constantly, arrogance and selfishness arise in their minds. Abandoning restraint, they give themselves up to the five desires, and fall into the evil paths of existence.

"Always I am aware of which living beings practice the way, and which do not, and in response to their needs for salvation I preach various doctrines for them. At all times I think to myself: How can I cause living beings to gain entry into the unsurpassed way and quickly acquire the body of a Buddha?"

In Refutation of the Abrahamists

I think we Buddhists have been too circumspect in our attempts at refuting Western religions. Maybe some of us think the Abrahamists have to work it out themselves. Maybe...but that hasn't happened. They just get deeper into the muck and their own self-righteousness.

We can disagree without being disagreeable - but we mustn't be shy about voicing our disagreements.

For instance # 1

I was once told that we should appreciate God for giving us our lives.

My response: "And what did we have (what were we) before God gave us life? What was it that God gave life to when he gave it to each of us before (obviously) we were alive to appreciate this gift? And why are we better off having this thing called life? What were we - before being granted life - that could have appreciated the difference?"

No one "gave" us life - we've always had it and always will. Each of us is alive (actually, "is alive again") because it was time for us to wake up (be reborn) from the sleep (dormancy) we were in after our previous life ended.

For instance # 2

I was once told that proof of God's existence is inferable, being based on the complexity of creation itself. "Only a Supreme Creator could have crafted such a mysterious and unfathomable work."

To which I would ask: "And what was It that, in turn, had created such a Supreme Creator? For surely such an awesome Supreme Creator must have, in turn, been created by Something even awesomer."

What too many people fail to appreciate is the fundamental Is-ness of the Universe. Put another way: It is what it is. If something appears complex to us, we don't have to jump to any conclusion that a Superior Craftsman must have created it. All we have to realize is, we don't understand or see the underlying mechanisms which brought it about. It's okay - really it is - to say, "I don't understand."

It is written: The greatest power of God must be to create other Gods. In effect, that's the essence of Buddhism, which I'll restate: "The greatest power of a Buddha must be to create other Buddhas."

For instance # 3

You don't have to look too hard to see how tightly the Abrahamists embrace the secular state. In fact, more than embrace statism, they worship it. The Zionist Jews sought safety in the creation of their own nation because they didn't feel protected while living as communities in other nations. There are Muslims who long for the re-establishment of a Caliphate as a breeding ground for the ideal Islamic society, as well as for protection against the imperialism of the infidels.

Then there are Bible Belt Americans - specifically the kind who refer to theirs as a Christian nation. The kind who don't have much use for diversity - at least, not religious diversity.

The Buddhist have a role model, on the other hand, which refutes all of the arguments of the statists. Shakyamuni Buddha was a prince who gave up his throne - who gave up his country - in order to reach out to as many as possible to preach his message. The true state exists within, and the sooner we get rid of the sovereign state, the more security each of us will have.

Imagine, for one thing, not having to flush trillions of dollars down the toilet by not having to maintain standing armies.

Imagine that.

Steven Searle

Losing candidate for US President in 2008

"The sovereign state is the greatest enemy of Enlightenment. It seeks only its own perpetuation at the expense of everything else - even of life on earth if necessary" - Steve.

Founder of The Best Party Available

Contact me: bpa_cinc@yahoo.com

Open Invitation: I hereby waive all copyright protection for any material I've posted on Zaadz/Gaia with these exceptions: I reserve the right to disseminate this material, claim authorship credit for it and any compensation I can negotiate. However, if anyone wishes to use these essays, they are free to do so. I do not require that advance permission be obtained, that I be paid any royalties, or that I receive author's credit or even be notified of intent to use. I truly want anyone "out there" to feel free to use these essays, in original or modified form, for whatever purposes they deem worthy.

Why Barack Obama resigned from the senate so prematurely. It might turn out that his vote as a senator would have been enough to pass (for example) the auto bailout bill. But his absence, on the other hand, might mean...

Peopling as a form of waving

When causes and conditions are right, the great oceans of our earth manifest waves.

When causes and conditions are right, the great Ocean of Life Force manifests people. This ocean permeates the entire universe, and is the "place" where our life forces go after we die.

To put it more succinctly: When causes and conditions are right, the great oceans of water wave, and the Life Force Ocean peoples.

I cannot remember where I'd first heard this comparison. Nor can I recall having ever read it anywhere. But it's always rung true to me, so I offer for your benefit what I've heard - adding a little of my own.

The Wave Aspect of our Lives

Each of our individual lives can be thought of as a single wave on a body of water. When causes and conditions are right, a wave rises above the surface of the water. In other words, a birth takes place - the birth of an entity similar to other such entities but not entirely identical to them. Just as a wave is born and keeps growing then later declines and dies (as part of its life cycle), so do each of us. We, like that wave, are born, grow, decline, and die.

In the case of the wave, we simply see that it is no more. But by that, we can only mean we no longer see it above the surface of the water. However, even though that unique wave no longer towers above the surface as a unique "body," that wave still exists under the surface in some diluted form. It's true that some of that deceased wave will give up some of its water to the ocean; it's also true that some of that wave's water will re-wave (that is, it will reincarnate when causes and conditions are right). In its newly-manifested, visible form, it will contain water it didn't have in its previous incarnation as well as water it did have.

We are like that watery wave. We are born, we grow, decline, and die. But what happens to us when we die - when our life force loses its body and disappears from view? We are simply under the surface in a manner of speaking - in a dormant, potential state of being. When causes and conditions are right, we rise once again to distinguish ourselves and enter plain view - this time with a different body. We lost a little to the great ocean of life, yet we gained a little too.

Not only are our lives and deaths comparable to the visible and sub-surface parts of a wave, so too are all of our waking and sleeping periods. When we wake up in the morning, that's like being reborn - like a wave first starting to appear. As our day wears on, we become more active, as does a wave as it rises and increases in strength. Then we tire and pass into sleep, as does a wave which crashes to the surface and is no longer visible while it sleeps below the surface. It will gather strength and reappear, just as we do when we sleep then awaken in the morning.

Those Born for the First Time

Maybe some of what we lose ends up animating "water" from the deep - so far from the surface, it never had a chance to become part of a wave or, to continue our metaphor, to ever be born. This wrinkle occurred to me after my 85^th oral recitation of the Lotus Sutra*, which speaks of those "born for the first time." This must have something to do with the concept that inanimate objects can attain enlightenment. Since even rocks are imbued with Life Force (but not consciousness), they too can eventually attain Buddhahood (but not in their rocky form).

What would it be like to meet someone who had never had a prior existence as a human being - someone who was born for the first time as a human being? Someone who had never had a prior incarnation as a person? Don't suppose for a moment that they would only have the capacity of a retard. Consider children. I'm amazed at how quickly the very young catch on. Perhaps those born for the first time are like these very young who catch on so quickly. Of course, there are others among the very young who are not so bright.

I suppose it all boils down to what kind of karmic stuff these First-time Humans brought with them into this world. Some of their karma was acquired while they existed in an inanimate state. But that could be said of all of us, First-time Human or not (even those born without bodies, having only consciousness).

The Consciousness of "Mere" Water

Is it at all accurate to compare the human life wave to a watery wave? Water is not conscious and cannot control its own destiny. In fact, it only rises to become a visible wave due to forces outside itself: wind, temperature, earth's rotation, and the moon's tidal effects (to name a few).

Before we become too smug as to how superior we are to the water in the ocean, we should consider Solaris by Stanislaw Lem. Written in 1951, it's about a planet of that name in another solar system which is inhabited by only one intelligent living being. That being is an ocean which almost completely covers Solaris. But this ocean has not only intelligence but power. It can move things - for example, it can "adjust" (by mental telepathy, for lack of a better term) Solaris's orbital path around its twin suns.

This ocean can even probe the minds of the human beings from Earth who are manning a space station trying to communicate with the Solarian Ocean (but the ocean won't comply). More than probe their minds, this Ocean can conjure into being walking, talking copies of people these astronauts had known on earth (or who'd existed only in their imaginations). When one astronaut meets a copy of his wife who'd died ten years earlier...well that's when this book becomes more human, so to speak.

NOTE: Don't bother with the movie version of Solaris, starring George Clooney - the Russian version directed by Tarkovsky is far superior.

Do nations and societies have karma?

Do families and nations have a group karma? That might sound like: "Can my stomach have its own karma, separate from that of the rest of me?" If my stomach developed cancer, then it would seem to be manifesting its own destiny. If my stomach's karma were too strongly connected to the rest of me, I would die. In a sense, my stomach would take me with it. If it weren't too strongly connected, I would continue to live - though my poor stomach might cease to exist by being cut out of me.

So the answer is yes, and I'll continue with this example: I am a citizen of the USA. I was born here and was influenced by that. But I was influenced by other things as well. Each of us is part of many bodies, some being more influential than others.

Think of a truly huge wave in the Pacific Ocean, perhaps a 40-footer. If you look closely, on the surface of that wave are smaller waves. That huge one is the USA; one of those tiny ones is me (another tiny one is you). Though we are part of that huge wave and have our roots in it, other waves in our immediate vicinity will influence us. Some of these other waves are as small as we are, while others are larger in varying degrees. All of