Holiday evening reflections (or, On being untethered in a mundane world)

The end of May draws near and in the United States it is unofficially now summer.

My job for the last nearly six years has been... uhh... well, to describe how unusual and stressful and frustrating it can be would require actual examples that no one would believe. It's not all bad, but the unbelievable and vexing parts are made worse by how unnecessary they are. So having a three day weekend is really valuable.

I would have posted something hear last week but my attention was grabbed by another mass shooting at a school in America. Once again the same well-funded political movement is blocking any meaningful changes to save lives by idolizing guns and gun violence. Once again there is a chance to put momentum into calls for reforms.

Whether heart-rending tragedies or the banal vagaries of every day life, many people have some form of reframing or re-contextualizing their experience of the world, either to try to make sense of or accept what transpires or generate and sustain motivation for change. While some will quibble over the use of spiritual as inadequate to label all such transformations in perspective, many such transformative experiences share common events such as being moved by natural beauty or music or other inspiring stimuli. Or by having one's mortality brought sharply into view for some reason.

In my last entry I referenced themes of health and wellness connected to our circumstances and how any type of spirituality, whatever its form, needs to be able to address everyday concerns as well as existential ones. The writing could use some revision but it was a quick lunchtime musing so it is a little untidy and lacking a bit in focus.

Nonetheless, it does lead to this: I never have been able to really get into or stick with any religion, sacred tradition, or anything more than an intellectual yet generic spiritual framework. As I've no doubt shared here before, I don't perceive the world around me as full of wonder and mystery and potential. It offers no sense of hidden truths or unseen depths. It's just flat. Mundane.

To use other language, no sense of the numinous. A super low score on the M-scale. A world without a soul. Neither empty nor full. Neither hot nor cold.

I like parts of Christian monasticism and a lot of the Westernized translations of Buddhism and so on, but commitment is hard when the mystique and newness wear off. I can appreciate the wisdom regarding the human condition but it's hard to not wander off and let whatever practice I had picked up lapse as there is little or no personal connection.

Some people may wonder what that means for dealing with everyday life or horrible catastrophes, but it's just like everyone else I guess only without turning to a liturgy or prayer or whatever. I guess we are all used to what we know? We all have our own ways of filtering and processing our experiences.

Sometimes I use spiritual language and gestures anyway because they are a form of expression even if you don't feel a deep belief or faith in the literal meaning of the gesture or expression, because why not? It's part of our shared human heritage. I don't mean any disrespect to those who idolize such religious forms, especially ones I have a personal connection to.

Humanity's truest nature: Milwaukee neighborhood rescues family from burning car

You may have seen or heard about a cartoon in which two people are talking and one suggests he wants to ask God why God doesn't do anything about the suffering in the world. His friend inquires why he doesn't ask, and the man states that he is afraid God will reply by asking him the same question. Some people want to separate prayer and action as mutually exclusive options and activities. Others get ticked off when God is thanked only for what appear to be favorable events from the perspective of the praise givers or when God is seen as getting credit that belongs to people. But if, as major elements of various sacred traditions suggest, (objective) reality is sacred and evil is the consequence of choosing a selfish delusion over a generous reality, if we are a part of this sacred continuum, and if we are then the hands and feet of the Divine, such errors and objections on the parts of the religious and non-religious fall away. Real theology, or theology of the most value or substance, doesn't revolve around philosophy, logic, or how to name or describe God. It is a lived experience reflected in moments such as this...

Tibetan Buddhism spreading in China

Geng Xiaozhen, 29, a Beijing resident who recently quit her job as an editor for a government-controlled Web site specializing in news from Tibet, said she learned about Tibetan Buddhism through her job...

"Many followers ask themselves how a person who studies and promotes Buddhism can instigate a riot," said Geng, the former Web site editor, referring to the protests last March. "I believe he is erudite and wise, and I will be lucky if I can see him in my lifetime. I don't believe he would ever drum up violence. He can't control people's minds."

Lu Xin, 67, a retired Chinese teacher who began to study Tibetan Buddhism in 1999, said she had recently visited monks in Aba prefecture, in Sichuan province, for a week. "Unlike people in Han Chinese areas, people there are very pure, kind and plain. As soon as I arrived, I felt I was in another world," Lu said. "Tibet is the only pure land left in the world, and I worry about its culture. For example, if we over-develop Qinghai Lake tourism, will the garbage and plastic pollute the environment? Will plain people be seduced by money? If I didn't study Tibetan Buddhism, I would know little about Tibet."

These quote are from an interesting article about the spread of Tibetan Buddhism among "Han" Chinese. Hope and irony intertwined like thorns on a rose bush.

Picnics for peace and other idiotic pacifist ideas

In the documentary film 10 Questions for the Dalai Lama, His Holiness suggests that one way we might see more peace in troubled areas such as Jerusalem is to have more gatherings like picnics and festivals. No doubt this strikes many people as foolish. After all, it is a religiously political struggle? (Or is a politically religious struggle?) Inequity and injustice require some kind of top down solution, right? Economic, military, etc. You've got to have high level meetings, and political road maps, and a week at Camp David between the leaders of the parties in conflict, right? Having people meet and greet is just idiotic. Isn't it? Do we really buy all of the teachings of such renowned spiritual leaders?

But let us ask ourselves why the Clinton initiative failed to bring a peace settlement in Israel. There is no single reason, but a huge one includes speculation that Yasser Arafat knew his people wouldn't accept the terms he was negotiating, and his counterpart, Ehud Barak, claimed he couldn't offer any more concessions. Both leaders realized they couldn't get any closer without alienating key segments of their populations, particularly powerful political supporters. This kind of impasse is rooted in the attitudes of certain groups of Palestinians and Israelis toward each other and fed by past and present conflict. These attitudes, which perpetuate and support the political and economic structures producing inequality and conflict, include distrust, fear, and hatred.

Daryl Davis and the Klan

Now let's turn to another historic example of distrust, fear, and hatred - the Ku Klux Klan and African-Americans. You may not be familiar with Daryl Davis. I first heard about him when his story was included in the film Understanding Race (part of the Films for the Humanities series). I later learned that he had published a book about his experiences going to Klan meeting called Klan-destine Relationships. None of this may strike you as peculiar until you hear the subtitle of the book: A Black Man's Odyssey in the Ku Klux Klan. His story is also told in a brief article that appeared in the Washington Post.

In brief, Davis met people who were in the Klan and was eventually invited to a Klan meeting. He was curious and friendly and non-judgmental, and became a familiar face at Klan events. In fact, an Imperial Wizard made Davis the godfather of his child. But what is really interesting is that his presence has been a catalyst which has led many members, including that Imperial Wizard, to quit the Klan. Some have even given Davis their robes, which he keeps in his closet. Imagine that - self-identified white supremacists quitting the Klan not because Davis laid on a guilt trip, not because he debated them into submission, but because of his persistent friendly presence.

The mechanics of changing perspective

One theory of how we form expectations about the world is that we organize our experiences into meaningful clusters we then name. This is called a schema. When we select a schema or a composite of schemas to be the standard for evaluating similar schemas. This standard is called a prototype. Similar schemas orbit loosely around the prototype, creating a category with fuzzy boundaries. For example, if we use our experiences to form a schema of holiday, we might include "having family over" and "preparing a large meal". When we experience a holiday without a big meal, we might remark that is just didn't seem like a holiday, because we were using that schema as a prototype to evaluate new experiences.

We can also use the example of the category automobile, in which we use our experiences with cars to form the basis of a schema which is then promoted to the prototype of the automobile category. Hence we may call a truck or jeep a "car", even though there are differences between trucks, jeeps, and cars. Trucks and jeeps are orbiting the idea of car-ness, which may include elements like "large rubber tires", "carries multiple passengers", "runs on an engine", "has pedals and a steering wheel".

This theory can help make sense of the relationship between Daryl Davis, the Klan, and the members who quit. I am not suggesting this theory must be true in every case, but a theory isn't much good if it has no explanatory power, so we can at least see if it produces a workable explanation. People in the Klan tend to have a particular kind of schema they use as the prototype for black people, which we might expect to be very negative. They had a new experience - a black man who wasn't angry or judgmental towards them and who seemed like a really friendly and sincere guy. This didn't match the expectations of the prototype of a black man. In some cases, the continued exposure formed that basis of a new schema of black people that either challenged or replaced the previous prototype (which in this case would correlate to the term stereotype). This sparked a re-evaluation of membership in an organization premised on a particular view of minorities.

This can be condensed into "they changed their minds when they actually got to know a black man", but the process involved - how and why they were prejudiced and the components of changing one's mind - are important. If Davis had been angry or judgmental, this might have reinforced a schema which includes an image of black people as angry and judgmental towards whites. It also highlights how important external influences can be in shaping our attitudes about anything and everything we encounter in our lives.

The relevance to conflict prevention and resolution

Turning back to the Dalai Lama and Jerusalem, I don't presume the Dalai Lama made his suggestion based on the mechanics of a theory from the social and behavioral sciences of the West. Instead, his Buddhist training and the wisdom of a lifetime of exposure to conflict and prejudice showed him the basic pattern, however we might wish to frame it. It would be unfair to say that he thinks that a few picnics will end all of the violence, but I do think he is pointing towards generating shared positive experiences between opposing or distrustful groups in order to offer a basis for new and more positive appreciation of each other. With such a grassroots change in attitude, the existing political and economic structures generating inequality and conflict between the sides would lose much of their support. If enough of the people want peace, they will have it.

People don't live in the abstract - in the "national" or the "global" scene. They live in the every day of their individual lives. Whether attempted solutions to the largest problems in society will either succeed or fail turns on what individuals experience and do in the everyday.