The star fish will always be with you.

[Pixabay]

The title might throw you off, but the topic is about charity, compassion, and religious outreach.

OK, so here's how we get from A to Z.

I was thinking recently about how some religious organizations and groups plan and organize their efforts to connect or engage with the community. The fact is that I tend to be either uninterested or skeptical about such efforts, so I wondered why that should be so and what advice I would offer. Not that my opinion should carry more weight than anyone else's, but to see if I could come up with something other than a complaint.

To be clear, I wasn't thinking of any particular effort, like a bake sale or raffle, just the general idea. And one of the things that occurred to me is the way that people sometimes have a tendency to treat other people as objects to validate their view of the world or as means to an end. In short then, interaction in such situations isn't about the individual as a person, a whole person, but some value attached to that person from the perspective of another party.

To stick with the religious example, from an institutional point of view, it may seem desirable to have more members. There are many reasons for this, but that desire there and we know it. From the perspective of validating one's worldview, there may also be a desire for people to join or convert to your religion or a specific form of that religion. These things may be rationalized as being "good for" the individuals converting and becoming members, yet the tell is in how people are being treated.

For example, how concerned is the institution or organization interested in the overall well-being of the individual versus their loyalty or commitment of the individual to the institution and its rules and requirements? How much pressure is there to conform to the institution's view of the world and its emphasis on how to live regardless of the effect this has on the individual's mental or emotional heath Or social development and fulfillment. Regardless of the individual's doubts, objections, or concerns?

This is a more extreme example, but subtler forms also exist for many institutions, social movements, and self-conscious social categories. My thoughts lead me to consider what effect these subtler forms of objectification/reduction of individuals have and what a different approach might look like.

This caused my thinking to take a bit of a "spiritual" turn.

Spiritual care for the hurting or seeking atheist

Atheist stickers. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Please.

Just please.

I am not going to advocate proselyting to atheists. Nor am I going to  attack, insult, belittle, or cast blanket aspersions against people who identify as atheist. I have a great deal in common with and much sympathy for those who do not profess a belief in God. I have commented before on the decline of manners and increased intellectual lassitude or ineptitude among some minority of people identifying as atheists on message forums and blogs. The ones who at times turn to the same over-generalizing, trivializing of others, lazy or dishonest quote mining, and other tactics often employed by hard-core proselytizing  religious fundamentalists.

What is the point of behaving like the very religious people who love to mock and ridicule the philosophy, ideas, and lives of atheists?, I wondered. I asked if this was a real trend and if so what might be behind it.

Some people like to use terms such as "atheist fundamentalist" or "new atheist" to loosely refer to such people. For reasons that should become clear, I think a more apt term is shallow atheist.

Now I've lectured on deviance and one of those lectures was on atheism, and we came to a sympathetic understanding of why those who feel stigmatized and persecuted might try to neutralize this feeling by reversing it. By over-generalizing about, demeaning, and belittling religion and religious people. By questioning their morals, their certainty, and even their sanity in order to establish the atheists' own. No, WE are the decent people. The ones who have logic and knowledge and facts on our side. We are the ones who are free of delusion.

Now, sometimes this is because someone is still shaking from having left a form of fundamentalist religion or is constantly being harassed because they live in a community that doesn't trust or tolerate those of a different or of no religion. That doesn't justify bad behavior, but it can explain a good bit of it.

But what about those who never continue to heal and get stuck in the mentality that all religion is the same and its all one very narrow thing? Who never move on and instead continue to need to feel better about themselves through crude and offensive slights and put-downs of anything remotely associated in their minds with religion?

Or those who may or may not have never really felt persecuted (even if they may have felt slightly awkward on occasion) over their atheism and who see it as a hip, misunderstood social identity for smart people and iconoclasts? The ones who are too cool in their own minds to ever have anything to do with those backward and outdated fools who are remotely connected to whatever might be associated with religion or spirituality?

The Psalms still sound awful to me

Image via Wikipedia

You may not be familiar with the Psalms. Even folks who have a favorite or two memorized or read portions of them on Sundays often aren't. But whether you are or aren't, here is a list I previously published about the take-away message I was getting from them as of last February. The basic themes I identified for the Psalmist(s) were:

• waiting for God (to help, to save, to be a friend, etc)
  
• trying to follow the Jewish laws and requirements
• claims his innocence
• then confesses his guilt
• bargaining/negotiating a trade of obedience for blessings
• desperate and fearful of mocking, violent, dishonest enemies
• angry at the the oppressors and murderers
• equates justice with blessing for the poor and oppressed
• equates justice with the horrible suffering and the swift destruction of the wicked and powerful
• recognizes (at least partially) the mercy and splendor of God
• sitting and lying down are equated with those stuck in sin
• walking and running are equated living in righteousness
• the (coming) judgment of God is good news to the weak, the infirm, the slave and the prisoner
• doesn't understand why God hasn't yet rendered judgment 
• maintains faith in God despite misgivings and disappointments 

It's interesting to me that even the most progressive or contemplative people in the Christian traditions, especially the vowed Religious, in a sense swear by them and affirm them as the very heart and soul of the Judeo-Christian tradition. Not only that, but I recall people who are in other sacred traditions and even some non-religious people speaking in glowing terms about the Psalms.  I am at times genuinely hard pressed to understand why that is.

Seriously.

Burn me, a wretch, O God, with undying fire

Image by SearchNetMedia via FlickrHaha, catchy title isn't it?  Let me explain.

Something occurred to me randomly long after writing and scheduling a previous post, a kind of extension, but it was too long to add to that post.  It had to do with things like prayers which we find ineffective or offensive or both.

The premise is simple: Why is it that people can outgrow a particular view of religion and still find prayers or other practices that seem to reinforce that older view worthwhile and useable? What about the contradiction?

So I thought it, "Let's pick a facetious prayer, completely fabricated, such as: God, I am a worthless piece of excrement. Let your judgment burn me like hot coals."

The power of caring--it isn't just for little cartoon bears

Image via WikipediaWhat do you think of when you hear the word "caring"? Is it something childish, superficial, overly sweet? Silly?

Caring is one of those words like compassion and love and God that has lost a lot of its mojo because of overuse and abuse. But caring is still important. It is another way to understand those other words, and its at the heart of spirituality, whether or not one embraces that term or practices a particular religion.

So is it really reasonable and worthwhile to care?

Are flaws key to virtue?

Image by chris.chabot via FlickrWhat do you think of positive spirituality?

Many people like to hear that they are part of the divine, that they have Buddha-nature, etc. It's cool. It's uplifting. For people who have a poor self-esteem, seeing the beauty in your existence, however you describe that wonder of life, can make a remarkable difference.

So why am I going to drop the other shoe?

Because there is just as much value in what is sometimes referred to as negative spirituality. Looking at the shadows. The faults. The flaws.

Life, death and eating human flesh

Among the Wari people of Brazil existed a tradition of eating the dead that cultural anthropologists have written about and discussed, often to the disgust or delight of students in Western societies who read about the practice.  The Wari appear to do so out of care and respect for the dearly departed, as a way of coping with and ridding themselves of grief.  There are many other elements in both ritual, function and meaning surrounding the Wari form of cannibalism, but this is as far as the story of the Wari goes here (those interested might want to read the book Consuming Grief.)


Yet the idea is compelling:  "Consuming grief".  

When people talk about cannibalism, the topic of transference may also arise.  That is, by eating the flesh of another, some properties of that person are somehow transferred to the person or persons consuming the body.  I don't claim to be breaking novel ground, but this leads me back to the my own cultural background and a practice with which I have first hand experience, which I am sure by now is readily identifiable.

Bleeding Heart (Revisited)

A post about caring and bleeding hearts received a very insightful reply cautioning against "damaged" people who try to help others without allowing themselves to heal first (and the suspicious motives and potentially disastrous outcomes connected to such help). It is an excellent point well worth addressing.

Absolutely. Those who externally talk about charity but who are not charitable to themselves, who talk about forgiveness but do not forgive themselves, display a false humility but are still deeply prideful, just like those who mistake arrogance for confidence.

Such helpers do not display bodhicitta, or caritas - a selfless boundless love that fully embraces the giver and the receiver. What they do for others they really do for themselves. They tend to impose what they think is best for others regardless of what others think, and if the recipients of their kindness aren't sufficiently grateful such givers are outraged.

This is why I included this part of a prayer I recently composed:

"May darkness and suffering transform those who experience them and in turn be transformed into a gateway for greater clarity and purpose and capacity for love. May we seek and embrace the strength and courage necessary to grow through our struggles, to find the opportunities in each crisis, and to calmly face our troubles. May we realize that our sense of isolation and incompleteness, the dark hole in our being, is a delusion, so that our grasping and craving in resentment and bitterness can give way to giving and receiving in joy and gratitude. Through this healing may our hatred give way to compassion, our greed to charity, and our ignorance to wisdom. May insecurity and arrogance give way to faith and confidence. Let cynicism and indifference and impatience burn away like the morning mist to reveal the wonder of our existence."

It is also why I like the following quote by a group of Australian aboriginal activists including Lila Watson:

"If you have come here to help me, you are wasting your time. But if you have come because your liberation is tied up with mine, then let us work together."

Bleeding Heart (Remix)

Adapted from this post originally published 9/14/06.

Too often many people who take human suffering and dignity seriously and personally are viewed in some quarters as being wimpy. As pansies. Or as "bleeding hearts". I, for one, pray for the strength to be a bleeding heart. It is a label that should be worn with honor. There is nothing weak or shameful about learning to surrender to, realize, accept, and promote boundless compassion. To cultivate bodhicitta. To embody agape... caritas... divine love.

The use of the term as an insult comes from failing to parse "weak" and "meek" in the sense that it is one thing to forgive or be patient when you are in a position of perceived powerlessness and when you display such qualities from a position of strength. Bragging, boasting, bullying, and intimidating those weaker than yourself is not courage or bravery. It is a sign of inner weakness and insecurity. Imposing your will on someone through force isn't nearly as tough as submitting to faith, hope and love. To have restraint. To forgive. To care. And so in a classic form of desperate rhetoric, those too weak to show restraint, to offer and accept forgiveness, and to care and be cared about by others, try to re-define their weakness as a sign of strength. They confuse force for power, fear for respect, and arrogance (which is threatened by the success of others) for confidence (which celebrates and is strengthened by the success of others).

With such a mindset it is easy to say or think that if someone is advocating "love, love, love" that she or he must be an idealistic weenie who needs a dose of the cold, hard, and harsh nature of reality. But that's just it. A truly sacred path (Buddhist, Taoist, Hindu, Jain, Sihk, Jewish, Christian, Muslim, Indigenous/Earth-Based, etc, or even a path with no name) is not one of shutting yourself off from the world, or transcending it in the sense of ignoring it or not caring about it. It is quite the opposite.

In the Mahayana tradition, for example, the Bodhisattva ideal of Buddhism involves learning to hear the cries of the world, to see and truly appreciate the nature of suffering. You are not building up walls, you are tearing them down and making yourself even more open to the circumstances which tend to buffet people about emotionally and mentally. Liberation comes from facing the causes of suffering - birth, sickness and injury, old age, and death - not from hiding from them. You don't just get a "dose" of reality - you get the whole thing.

Similarly, in the Abrahamic traditions people are to love others as they love themselves. Christians should (and generally do) understand this better than anyone - according to their theology and view of history, Christ was meek, loved everyone, and embraced pain and the suffering of all in order to save them. According the the Gospels, he loved so much he bled for the world. His heart pierced by the Roman centurion's spear, he bled for love. I wonder how many people who use the term "bleeding heart" as a pejorative claim to worship and obey one on Sunday mornings? I myself am humbled to be in such company.

And so it goes with each sacred path.

Cultivating love, loving-kindness, metta - whatever name you prefer - in the face of such exposure to the best and the worst in humanity, for all of humanity, for all sentient beings - THAT is tough. Tough love. But you keep going - learning to allow, learning to accept, learning to appreciate. There is a popular imagery of doing something so long, so hard, and with such extreme resolve, that you are said to do it "until you bleed". This is a powerful image because A) blood is equated with life and vitality and our most intimate and precious resource(s) and B) many types of repetitious physical activities wear and crack the skin until the person does literally bleed. As the fictional vampire Spike points out in a memorable quote from an episode of the television series Buffy the Vampire Slayer: "{I}t's always got to be blood... Blood is life. It's what keeps you going. Makes you warm. Makes you hard. Makes you other than dead."

So, then, do those who risk and give of themselves to truly care, not just about an abstraction like humanity (or some defined subset of people like "Americans"), but for each individual as a unique person worthy of that love, have bleeding hearts? Of course. You keep giving. You keep loving. You love until you bleed. (Then you love a bit more*)



----------------
*Of course, you have to care for yourself as well, and realize your reasonable limits. No one runs a marathon the first time they decide to get in shape by jogging. Burning out from over-extending yourself is neither beneficial nor inevitable.

2008 ugly dog champ loses battle with cancer

Belated death notice. I love the dogs in the Ugly Dog competition. While Victoria is my all-time favorite (see her pic and profile by scrolling down on this list of 2006 contenders), Gus was also very heart-touching.

World's ugliest dog dies after cancer battle
A one-eyed, three-legged dog that won the title of world's ugliest canine last summer has died after losing a battle with skin cancer.

Gus, a nine-year-old Chinese crested dog from St Petersburg, Florida, captured the hearts of judges at the 20th Annual World's Ugliest Dog contest at the Sonoma-Marin Fair in northern California.

The dog, which was bald except for a white tuft on the top of its head, came from humble origins. Gus had one eye, after losing the other years ago in a fight with a cat, and hobbled through life on three legs after the fourth was amputated because of a skin tumour.

The dog was rescued by Jeanenne Teed and her daughter Janey when it was a puppy after they learned that it was being kept in a crate inside someone's garage.

When her pet won the contest in June, Ms Teed said the prize money would be put toward the dog's radiation treatment...

source

Their knowledge is expressed in other words, or remains unspoken

An stirring quote I read the other day attributed to Simone Weil:

"Christ does not save all those who say to Him, 'Lord, Lord.' But he saves all those who out of a pure heart give a piece of bread to a starving man, without thinking of Him in the least little bit. And these, when He thanks them, reply: 'Lord, when did we feed thee?' An atheist and an infidel, capable of pure compassion, are as close to God as is a Christian, and consequently know Him equally well, although their knowledge is expressed in other words, or remains unspoken. For 'God is love.' "

I am not familiar with the details of Weil's theology, although I've read she had a mystical interfatih bent, but I think this passage demonstrates a dimension of the concept of salvation that has been lost in the focus on the supernaturalistic legalism surrounding the obsession with the 'afterlife'.

Woodmoor Village Post Hits Nail On Head - Living Buddha, Living Christ

Nacho and I agree on a lot and we also differ in some perspectives, but he articulates well something I have also felt needs to be said and shared:

I think the Buddha is alive and well nowadays. There are lots of folks out there who are doing Buddha work (and not necessarily Buddhists)... Unfortunately, the image of the Buddha (or of Jesus Christ for that matter) that we tend to see, that of a lone individual, slogging through the vicissitudes of life, is only muddied through the eyes of a distinctly United States, and possibly Western, individualism that posits a lone individual as making it, saving the community...

Instead, it has always being about how transformation, love, compassion, kindness, etc. rests with us, how we can bring it all into a flow of being and becoming... that capability is not the sole domain of "Buddhists" nor does it have to be spiritually tinged nor religiously governed. I've met folks for whom "living like Jesus Christ" means precisely what I've stated above -- filtered through a narrative of redemption and suffering very similar to the Buddhist narrative.

Right on!

Hyperbole versus substance

I was just reading some comments made about a minor "incident" in college athletics that had some fans upset. Many of them were talking about betrayal, hatred, revenge, etc. One of them claimed to "live and die" for the team. This kind of overblown vicarious narcissism isn't limited, however, to a few people who have childish fixations on a sports team or political party.

If you really lived and died for something, truly, then you would NOT get upset over trivial things. You would see the bigger picture and the bigger commitment. In fact, you would have to be more patient, more steadfast, and more conscientious. You would act firmly and decisively when necessary, not out of vain emotionalism or spite. Rather than reacting as a surrogate arbiter to the validity of motives and trials of others you would be paying attention to your own life and your own responsibilities.

This kind of superficial loyalty manifesting as fanaticism happens everywhere. In politics it can be seen in the extreme rhetoric of jingoism, the distorted imitation of genuine patriotism. The symbols of the nation are conflated with the principles for which they stand and in some cases trump those principles - that is, protecting the flag outweighing freedom of expression. Slogans and judgementalism are also part of the mix, with a strong distinction between those who are "with" or "against" a group based on whether they "honor" the right symbols (which in practice is virtually idolatry) and profess the proper beliefs, at least in public. The same kind of mentality has also been observed for some religious institutions as well.

On a personal level, this can be seen in the distinction between true confidence, which does not require boasting or bragging and which can support and be happy for the success of others, and arrogance, which is based on insecurity. Nationalistic jingoism and religious exclusivist-fanaticism are just the same kind of insecurity in a social psychological context.

Hence genuine faith and confidence are based in what is real and substantial, not the projections and agendas of the ego (in Buddhist terms) or the false self. True confidence of the heart comes from knowing, not just knowing about or thinking about, the root of compassion...

If I speak in human or angelic tongues, but do not have love, I am only a resounding gong or a clanging cymbal. If I have the gift of prophecy and can fathom all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have a faith that can move mountains, but do not have love, I am nothing. If I give all I possess to the poor and give over my body [to hardship] that I may boast, but do not have love, I gain nothing.

Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. It does not dishonor others, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres.

Here love is not simply an affection or affectation, it represents what is real in the depths of the heart (of our being and of the cosmos). But without getting into an overly specific religious context, the description here is in contrast to the immature, insecure, and selfish nature that leads to the harming of others and ourselves.

Which is why I am fond of the Peace Prayer of St Francis of Assisi...

Lord, make me an instrument of Thy peace;
where there is hatred, let me sow love;
where there is injury, pardon;
where there is doubt, faith;
where there is despair, hope;
where there is darkness, light;
and where there is sadness, joy.

O Divine Master,
grant that I may not so much seek to be consoled as to console;
to be understood, as to understand;
to be loved, as to love;
for it is in giving that we receive,
it is in pardoning that we are pardoned,
and it is in dying* that we are born to Eternal Life.

Amen.


*in my reading I see this not simply as mere physical death but as the death of the false self, the death of its ability to convince us it is all we are.

Maundy Thursday

Also known as Holy Thursday, the name Maundy Thursday derives from the Gospel of John, 13:34...

"Mandatum novum do vobis ut diligatis invicem sicut dilexi vos..."

("A new command I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another...")

This is set in the context of the Last Supper. Scholars of the life of Jesus have noted the social, political, and spiritual dimensions of sharing meals in the Jewish community, particularly the time in which the life and story of Christ is set. Moreover, this appears to be a central feature of Jesus' movement (note the frequency of references to him dining, particularly to him dining with those who were considered unworthy, unclean, or at the lowest end of the social order; also note his parables and aphorisms related to the metaphor of dining). The sharing of a meal can be seen as acceptance reflecting the inclusiveness of universal compassion.

Hence the Last Supper, whether taken literally or not, reflects and magnifies the importance of this symbolism (ritualized in the practice of the Eucharist), which is summarized in the above quote. The context here is one of love in action, not merely in words. Given the state of affairs in the Middle East, Tibet, Burma, the Sudan, and also in our own local neighborhoods, we would all do well, Christian or no, to consider and reflect on this message.

Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani!

"And I cried to the Lord, saying why should I be thus, seeing I was never addicted to commit those evils? And the Lord answered that it was needful I should have a sense of all conditions, how else should I speak to all conditions; and in this I saw the infinite love of God. I saw also that there was an ocean of darkness and death, but an infinite ocean of light and love, which flowed over the ocean of darkness."

-George Fox, founder of the Religious Society of Friends ("the Quakers"), from a journal dated to 1647 C.E.

"Thus, when one has boarded the ship of the Vow of great compassion and sailed out on the vast ocean of light, the winds of perfect virtue blow softly and the waves of evil are transformed. The darkness of ignorance is immediately broken through, and quickly reaching the land of immeasurable light, one realizes great nirvana."

-Shinran Shonin, founder Shin Buddhism, from The True Teaching, Practice and Realization of the Pure Land Way, dated to 1224 C.E.

You are good enough to make a difference

"Any human who feels that he or she is not 'good enough' to cultivate peace and generosity is overlooking the wondrous gift of life. You live, therefore you are good enough."

-Dhyani Ywahoo, Voices of Our Ancestors

Is it me or does this almost come across like a challenge or something? I think it was intended to be inspirational, but it seems like it can also be read as saying "Why aren't you taking your life and what you can do with it seriously? What's your excuse, anyway?"

What soothes you when you are freaking out?

Or when you are really nervous, upset, or angry? I mean, honestly, debating the nature of the Divinity of Christ or discussing the implications of emptiness for everyday life are NOT really going to make you feel better when you are panicked. Suddenly, a lot of the little phrases people sometimes toss around ("It's OK, even what you're going through now is impermanent...")can sound crass and grating rather than insightful or compassionate. People don't need an intellectual Dharma lesson, they need a practical one (such a well-timed hug or thoughtfully placed pat on the shoulder or even eye contact that shows you care and are concerned). So, when you become really distraught or overwrought, not just a little upset or a little out of sorts - what helps bring you out of it and calm you down? (And, by extension, what do you do for others who are similarly overwhelemed by their current perceptions and circumstances - in all honesty and with triteness aside, What would Jesus or the Buddha do?)

Widening our circle of compassion

"A human being is a part of the whole called by us universe, a part limited in time and space. He experiences himself, his thoughts and feelings as something separated from the rest, a kind of optical delusion of his consciousness. This delusion is a kind of prison for us, restricting us to our personal desires and to affection for a few persons nearest to us. Our task must be to free ourselves from this prison by widening our circle of compassion to embrace all living creatures and the whole of nature in its beauty."
-Albert Einstein

Reverend Ryuei on the Dharma of Mr. Rogers

Rev. Ryuei has a new entry up on his blog in which he examines a book written by the late Fred Rogers (a.k.a. "Mr. Rogers"). It is worth a look, especially for a recent visitor who has been posting comments expressing confusion, frustration, and pain...(sample below)

"With all the sadness and destruction, negativity and rage expressed throughout the world, it's tough not to wonder where the living presence is. Well, we don't have to look very far. Deep within each of us is a spark of the divine just waiting to be used to light up a dark place. The only thing is - we have the free choice of using it or not. That's part of the mysterious truth of who we human beings are."

The poor, the sick, the criminal, and the outcast

I just posted some questions (and my answers) on another site regarding those who are often neglected or abused. I am posting these questions here as well, along with my answers. Here are the questions: How do you perceive your connection to such people? Do you feel compelled to reach out to them? Are there limits to what you will sacrifice to reach out to such people? Do you see such outreach as an obligation or an opportunity? Of those who are shunned, misunderstood, feared, or exlcuded in western society, which group personally offends, repulses, or otherwise makes you feel uncomfortable the most?

Here are my answers:

How do you perceive your connection to such people?

My Christian experience tells me that all are created equal in the image of the Divine, and that what I do to any of us I do to all of us, to the Christ-nature that shines through all of God's children. In this sense I am reminded of the story of St. Francis of Assisi and the leper. Because Francis came from a wealthy merchant family in Assisi, he had many attitudes he had to deal with in loving others. He biggest weakness was lepers. I would imagine the reaction of disgust and fear would be at least as bad if not worse than some people's reaction today to someone with AIDS (especially as Hanson's Disease causes disfiguration). Well, the story goes that he was traveling one day and saw a leper in rags on the side of the road ringing a bell and yelling "Unclean! Stay away! Unclean!" Despite his initial reaction, Francis walked over to the man, put his arms around the leper, and hugged him. He even kissed the man's cheek. Francis felt a great swell of joy and peace. Later that night, he had a dream in which he saw the beggar again, but when the beggar drew closer, Assisi could see that the man he had embraced had been Christ all along.

My Humanist background suggests that all humans are from a common biological family as members of the network of living creatures on this planet. We all have the same capacity to feel pain and pleasure, joy and sorrow, and we are at our best when we look out for one another. To give a concrete example, by ignoring the health care disparity between rich and poor, the impoverished communities become a lab for creating virulent new drug resistant strains of disease that will not hesitate to spread to the wealthier communities. When we help others, we are really helping ourselves.

My Buddhist exposure confirms both of the previous insights by suggesting all sentient beings have Buddha-nature, that is, they are all self-aware aspects of the Ultimate Reality from which creation constantly springs. Being interdependent, then, what one does to others impacts oneself. Or to put it another way "He who experiences the unity of life sees his own Self in all beings, and all beings in his own Self, and looks on everything with an impartial eye" (Siddhartha Gautama, a.k.a. the Buddha).


Do you feel compelled to reach out to them?

I feel that when I am really exposed to them, in a genuine way, I can't help but want to do something. But it is all too easy to be caught up in consumerism, commercialism, and other distractions. You know there are people suffering, but you feel disconnected from it. I don't want to reach out to feel like I am doing good works and being a "good" anything, i.e., I never wanted to do such things to feel like a "good" Christian, or a "good" Humanist, or a "good" Buddhist. It comes down to making yourself vulnerable by decreasing that sense of separation from those whom it is easy to judge or disdain. I think Lila Watson, an Aboriginal activist from Australia, expressed this very well: "If you have come here to help me, you are wasting your time. But if you have come because your liberation is tied up with mine, then let us work together."


Are there limits to what you will sacrifice to reach out to such people?

Yes, at least for now. I am not defending that. Ultimately it will come down to whether I can get past such limitations. I think it is easy to imagine these limitations only involve time or money, but there are other resources and commitments that are important, and I think it gets back to letting go of our own hang-ups and seeing charity as being a form of spiritual materialism, where we think we ought to be lauded for our giving. And that really limits what we do. How we act. And this matters because it is one thing to be generous at Christmas or when the United Way campaign at your office gets its pledge drive under way, or even to be generous when we volunteer at places like soup kitchens. But what about other times, when it so easily becomes "out of sight,out of mind"? I also think there is a danger in limiting who we think is suffering. Many times the poor, the ill, and the outcast, come to a sense of Presence in their lives long before those who live what are materially comfortable lives. So can we share, can we share more than just things like money, and can we share ourselves without hesitation with everyone we meet? I cannot claim to do so just yet.

Do you see such outreach as an obligation or an opportunity?

Getting back to an earlier reply, I would say it depends. I feel like we should see such things as opportunities. Both Christianity and Buddhism emphasize that adversity and people who set themselves up as our enemies are actually our greatest teachers, and we should have great compassion for such people who are in the end harming themselves to give us an chance to grow and to practice what we preach.


Of those who are shunned, misunderstood, feared, or exlcuded in western society, which group personally offends, repulses, or otherwise makes you feel uncomfortable the most?

I would say abusers. People who abuse those physically weaker than themselves. That would include spouse-beaters, children beaters, rapists and molestors, those who participate in animal cruelty, etc. I don't think Jesus or Buddha take sides - their messages are open to all. But I think that would be the group that I have the most trouble with as far as seeing the image of God, or Christ-nature, Buddha-nature, etc, in them.

--
If you like, feel free to share your own answers to these questions in the comments section.