Welcome

All the Fits that's News to Print

Thursday, December 17, 2009

All In Good Cheer

Tis the Season!  Passing along my Wish.
merrily ripped from TSS, just to you!

May all your candles point in the right direction for 2010.


Wednesday, December 16, 2009

Selected Columns

These columns are from a small (very!) alternative weekly called the Harbinger, now long gone. I first wrote there and at another small paper during the 1970's an 80's, moved on to bigger papers and magazines, then came back home to briefly replace the irreplaceable Stonewall Boulet Stickney, who died in 1996. 









Some good soul put up an online selection. These first comes from 1996, the others from 1997. 

Requiem for Salvo
The Lie that Tells the Truth
JAMES DICKEY ~ Tuscaloosa MFA daze
Allen Ginsberg in Mobile

Best read late at night, in a slightly rueful mood. A splash of Scotch or some cold white wine helps.

Tuesday, December 15, 2009

Western Mind Eastern Heart

This originally appeared in Yoga International (March/April 1996) as part of a series on the Guru-Disciple tradition.  It  briefs the Teacher-Student, Guru-Disciple or Master-Apprentice relationship in the Western and Eastern traditions.


Western Mind ~  Eastern Heart
The Master-Disciple Tradition

 by


Clark Powell


        Despite obvious differences in ritual and terminology, the great spiritual traditions of the world appear to agree on one essential point -- the seeker of ultimate Reality should obtain the services a living master, zaddick, sheik, roshi, elder, lama, or guru. Anyone who takes the trouble to study the esoteric wisdom paths from primal or shamanistic cultures to the major world religions cannot fail to be struck by this repeated admonition: "Scriptures can take you only so far -- you must find a master!"

      But is this relevant today, especially in the democratic, information-rich society of the West?  Why can't we realize God or Self on our own, without involving a human guide or intermediary in this most intimate process? And how would we find such a guru anyway?  How would we recognize that person as an authentic master? Are there requirements or credentials we can look for in a master, regardless of the tradition he or she represents?

     Almost everyone who enters the spiritual arena with a sincere and adventurous heart eventually asks questions like these.  They are not just modern issues but are basic and perennial concerns that have been raised since pre-history.  Yet for some of us struggling to integrate the ancient guru-centric traditions of the East into our own time and far-different world, these have become critical and often painful questions.  Indeed, some of these private struggles are now legal issues, involving not only the outrage of individuals, but the heartbreak of whole communities.

     This article will focus on the first question: Is the guru-disciple tradition valid for a modern Westerner, or is it a defunct and outmoded model, too susceptible to abuse by both charlatan "gurus" on one hand and treacherous "disciples" on the other?  In the next issue, I will try to focus on the character and characteristics of the authentic guru as well as the qualified disciple, and talk about ways we might find such a teacher for ourselves, should we feel so inclined.

        Because the relation between guru and each disciple is intimate and unique and because yoga has always emphasized direct experience over abstract theorizing, I hope the reader will understand why I must include as an example of the guru-disciple tradition the ongoing relationship I have with my own guru, Parthasarathi Rajagopalachari, the third in the lineage of the masters of the Raja Yoga system known as Sahaj Marg, or Natural Path.  I feel that speaking of my own experience is first a matter of journalistic integrity in disclosing my own biases, and second, that my story is probably similar to that of other Westerners with other gurus, and so may serve as a kind of personal illustration of the concepts under discussion.

      I am not recommending my practice or my guru over others that may be equally or even more suitable for particular readers, or suggesting that the guru path is the only way to advance spiritually.  It is not. Nor is it for everyone at every stage in their spiritual journey.  But at least we might have some idea of what the guru-disciple tradition is actually about so that we can decide for ourselves.           

The Great And Powerful Oz

   Curiously enough, the idea of benefiting from a guru is repugnant to many Americans.  The "curiously enough" is inserted because, first of all, the Christian gospels present a perfect example of the guru- disciple tradition. No matter how it is interpreted by fundamentalist zealots, the New Testament is a no less than a disquisition on the role of the guru.  Far from being at odds with the other great traditions of the East, Western Christianity is in harmony with Sufism, Hinduism and Buddhism regarding the role of the teacher-exemplar.

       Second, it is curious that we Westerners balk at trusting a guru with our spiritual welfare when we feel no such reluctance in placing our physical well-being in the hands of other human beings almost every day.  The necessity of human interdependence is a fact of everyday life. Most of us eat food grown by others, wear clothes fabricated by others, and use computers and telephones we could never have invented and whose workings we hardly understand. When we board an airplane we willingly trust our lives to a pilot we have never seen; we trust a surgeon to open our bodies under anesthesia; even when we get in a car, we must trust the driving skills of other motorists. Why then do we resist the idea of trusting an adept, who is after all an expert coach or trainer in spirituality?

       Already I can hear the familiar objection: Yes, but what about the fake gurus?  It is true that charlatans and psychotics often attract large followings who honestly consider them to be gurus. It is also possible for genuine masters to make simple mistakes, or, more seriously, to devolve or backslide.  This is no less true today than it has been for centuries_it has always been part of the dance, and it will doubtless continue in the future.  But the existence of failed or counterfeit gurus does not mean that the real article isn't out there somewhere for these tragic figures to imitate, since counterfeits are impossible without genuine originals.  That authentic Rembrandts exist is not negated by the forged copies that surface; indeed, his mastery is confirmed by the counterfeits_for what fool would try to pass off a forged copy of something that was of no value, or never existed in reality?  This would be like making counterfeits of pennies or of 25-dollar bills. Dismissing all gurus because of false teachers or deluded cults may be comforting for us, since it allows us to remain in our cynical easy-chairs and do nothing about our own spiritual journey, but it is a bit too simplistic to dismiss the possibility that living gurus exist based on the behavior of a few sensationalized poseurs. This is like refusing to accept money because there may be forged notes floating around somewhere.

     Another misunderstanding of the guru-disciple tradition lies in the American tendency to fashion the spiritual domain into our notion of a democracy, where every individual is king and every man a priest.  But even the most cursory examination reveals that men and women are at many levels of enlightenment. This is also a mistaken view of the proper relation between the guru and chela, or student, and smacks of narcissism when it derives from a desire to approach God on our own terms with our egos intact, or even inflated by our imagined accomplishments. "I did it my way" may be fine for Frank Sinatra, but the wise ones understand the old proverb: "There is not room for two in one cot -- if God is to come into your heart, you must be absent."

       In short, few Westerners appreciate what the guru-disciple tradition really involves.  Many of us have accepted as a substitute for this understanding the familiar of media scandal mentality. We imagine some phony imperious leader who is suspiciously like ourselves in his desire for admiration and sex and money.  Furthermore, this guy, who is invested with all our own projected weaknesses, has duped a throng of gullible saps into believing him and obeying his every wish, just as the newspapers and newscasts reassure us whenever they can find such an example. Others among us secretly harbor a kind of comic-book expectation that our guru will be an infallible super-hero with miraculous powers of clairvoyance and other flashy yogic siddhis. Unfortunately, even those of us who have taken the trouble to gain direct experience with a guru are often influenced by these popular misconceptions. In the mind's continuing battle between defensive cynicism on one hand and naive romanticism on the other, the reality of the guru before us is often difficult to locate.

 

Pay no Attention to that Man behind the Curtain


       Despite these difficulties, many in the West are beginning to see that the ancient guru-disciple tradition of the East is actually one of mutual love and respect between two very human beings.  It need not be "transformed" to suit Western tastes, because the Eastern tradition has always been a reciprocal relationship between the master and heart-child, a relationship as often filled with fun and laughter as with difficulty and release.  The tradition of the guru, at least as I have experienced it, is certainly is not the culture-bound, patriarchal lord-and-serf affair that is currently being portrayed in some New Age circles.

       Perhaps I've simply been fortunate in my selection, but issues of power and authority do not arise between my Master and me any more than they would between a grandfather and his grandchild.  We simply enjoy being together.  Along with many in the West, I am coming to realize that no experience is more wonderful or more endlessly fascinating than having a lifelong relationship with a worthy guru. It is a relationship which can expand to fill the entire universe, a mystery which embraces all other possible human relationships -- mother and infant, father and son, friend and companion, mentor and student, lover and beloved.  Some of us are beginning to understand that knowing a Guru may be the greatest delight and the most fortunate experience that can come to a human being.

     My own master, whom we call simply Chariji, loves to joke and spin our unspoken biases.  For example, once when I walked into his kitchen he greeted me this way: "Hello, boss!"  Seeing that I was somewhat startled by this, he added, "Oh Clark, you are like most people. You don't want to have a boss, do you?  But you see, I want more and more bosses, for that would mean more people are accepting my services." Chariji is very clear that a guru must be one who is ever ready to serve, and should have absolutely no ideas of pride or arrogance, for as he was told by his own guru, "At the outset I cannot say that I am one of the best masters, but your experience will tell that I am one of the best servants."

       That being the case, I once suggested to Chariji that the word "master" is not a good one to use since it seems to get Americans so riled up, and that maybe the word "servant" should be used instead. He thought a moment, and said, "No, it would not be appropriate.  In India, when we say `Master,' the word does not imply a relationship, you know, master and slave.  `Master' really means only `one who has mastered himself.'"  And to this we might add a second quality: "One with the power to make others like himself."

      Though one's relation with a true guru is not hierarchical -- at least not from the viewpoint of the guru, who sees the Divine in all -- neither is it some casual, buddy-buddy kind of thing.  Human as the guru may be, he or she is also an extraordinary being whose divine nature must also be reckoned with.  Therefore, surrender and obedience have always played a central role in the life of the disciple.  Even so, Ram Chandra of Shahjahanpur, who is my own master's guru (he was known as "Babuji" since he worked as a clerk or babu), once told Chari that even when a master gives an order, the disciple must always verify it in his heart before acting, for whether he obeys his guru or not, the disciple remains responsible for his own choices and actions. In the same vein, Babuji's master, Shri Ram Chandra of Fatehgarh (or Lalaji, as he was known affectionately) made this observation:

     Three tests may be applied to a given decision or action: If the Scriptures, the guru, and one's heart agree, then the action is correct.

    One day I asked Chariji, "But what if the Scriptures and the external guru say one thing, and my heart says another?" Chariji's answer was clear: "Then you must follow your heart." So I asked him if he had ever disobeyed his own Master.  "I disagreed with Babuji many times," he chuckled, "but I never disobeyed him."   There is much to understand in this reply.  Sahaj Marg puts the premium on obeying ones heart.   And Sahaj Marg also acknowledges the mystery of bhakti, or love, in which the devotee and the beloved become one.  Thus Radha in her mystic union with Krishna calls her own name.  Thus John Lennon and Paul McCartney write, "I am he as you are he as you are me and we are all together."

So in the end, there is no inner Master, no outer Master.  There is only the Master, withing and without.  Such a condition in Sahaj Marg is called layavastha.  It is very rare, and not everyone is made for this particular aspect of the Path.

     Thus, obedience in the tradition of Sahaj Marg becomes an intuitive art, since external discipline is never imposed.  No Sahaj Marg master issues orders; instead, he humbly makes requests or offers suggestions to his "associates," which was Babuji's term for most Sahaj Marg practitioners, and even then, those associates must listen closely to detect these delicate hints.  True gurus understand the difficulties of obedience, possibly because they were disciples themselves.  As Paramhansa Yogananda noted:  


"No disciple is forced to obey his guru. Freedom to accept or reject is one of the first laws of spiritual life.  Any guru who demanded mindless obedience from his disciples would attract only mindless disciples.  He would be given a wide berth by strong-willed devotees, who alone are fit for the path to God-realization."

       But recognizing the divinity of our guru does not mean that we must ignore the fact that the guru is also human.

        Can a master make mistakes?  Of course!  "The master may or may not be right, but the Truth is always right," Chariji once wrote me cryptically in a letter when I had strongly disagreed with some views he had expressed. Babuji used to joke that this is what made a master greater than God, for God is not able to make mistakes!  (It may also be one explanation for one of Babuji's more mysterious remarks: "God is limited, but the Master is unlimited.")

        Does a Master grow and change?  Naturally!  In Chari's view we should beware of any system headed by a "perfect" guru, because then the whole structure beneath that guru is static, like a frozen pyramid.  Because Sahaj Marg considers the Goal to be Infinite, it is said to be dynamic system in which even the Masters are still "swimming toward the Center."

      Balancing discriminating wisdom with great devotion, jnana with bhakti, is a rare talent, but in the great disciples one always finds that these two qualities are blended and inseparable.  Babuji liked to describe the ideal disciple as having "a Western mind and an Eastern
heart."  The way to God is not for "spiritual weaklings," as Yogananda liked to point out, yet such strong-minded, open-hearted disciples are rare not only in the West, but also in the East.  For this reason, Lalaji used to say, "I require lions, not sheep.  But I have admitted even sheep in my satsangh (here, 'association') for courtesy's sake."  And Babuji, who said he would rather have one lion than ten-thousand sheep, explained his preference with another statement:  "I have not come to make disciples.  I have come to make masters."

There's No Place Like Home

      Even granted that authentic gurus do exist, questions still remain, including these two:

Is a guru really necessary these days?  Can't we just go to the Source directly?   The answer to both questions, frankly, is "yes."  We can indeed go to the Source directly, without any assistance from a fellow human being, and we are welcome to try whenever we like.  Yet history has shown that very few are born with the capacity to realize the Ultimate in one lifetime without any assistance.  These may be what the Buddhists call the Tathagatas, which means literally "thus come," and the Hindus call Avataras, or divine incarnations, who are born not as we are, because of the dictates of our karma, but because they are sent into the world to instruct and to uphold the dharma.  But one must remember that even the great sages and saviors often required a human touch to awaken them or at least to consecrate them to their Work.  Buddha's enlightenment under the Bo tree had been prepared by all his efforts with the Brahmins and the ascetics; Ramakrishna's awakening was sparked by Totapuri; Jelaluddin Rumi's by Shems-i-Tabriz. We have no record of the training of Jesus, but the role of John the Baptist in inaugurating Christ to His work has been documented.

       Those who are more or less satisfied with their lives generally view an interest in gurus and spiritual matters as inexplicable or even downright weird.  For most people, the question of needing a guru never even surfaces, simply because very few venture beyond the comfortable neighborhood of the particular religion they were born into by an accident of geography.  Most of us can get by with the local priests or rabbis or mullahs, or with our own instincts, for that matter.

      Clearly, we need no guide to show us around our own front yard, but if we wish to climb the Himalayas, it is wise to seek out a sherpa. The spiritual seeker is an adventurer who must question the assumptions of conventional morality or religion, which explains why such souls have traditionally been subjected to tormenting doubt, deep despair, and serious trouble.  Because if you want to be honest about it, once we dare to depart the base camps of our everyday world, we soon discover that we're ascending a route that we can't comprehend toward a summit we're not sure even exists.

     At this juncture, those who reject the idea that they can benefit from a guru often don't appreciate the magnitude of the inner mountain which stands between them and the Ultimate.  Eventually, we may come to understand that the Path is filled with incredible difficulties and blind alleys of maya and ego, and why it is said that hundreds of lifetimes can be spent exploring what turns out to be a dead end.  We can easily mistake the crests of foothills for the final summits of spirituality, and never realize we have stopped far short of our destination.  The trek is often tedious and seemingly endless, and an experienced guru serves as both a comfort and a goad to keep us moving on till we have left even the mountain itself, and come to a place where there are no more valleys, no summits, no path, no master, and no disciple.

     Once we find this out for ourselves, we can see that it may not be childish dependency but mature judgment that leads some to seek the guidance of a master.  For as the old proverb says, "If you wish to know the Way, find the one who travels up and down upon it."



Bibliography

Chandra, Ram (Lalaji).  Truth Eternal.  Shahjahanpur, India: Shri Ram Chandra Mission, 1986.
Chandra, Ram (Babuji).  Complete Works of Ram Chandra: Volume I.Pacific Grove, CA: Shri Ram Chandra Mission, 1989.
Rajagopalachari, P.  Role of the Master in Human Evolution.Munich: Shri Ram Chandra Mission, 1986.
_______________.  The Principles of Sahaj Marg: Volume VIII.Shahjahanpur, India: Shri Ram Chandra Mission, 1994.
Vivekananda.  The Yogas and Other Works.  New York: Ramakrishna-Vivekananda Center, 1984.
Walters, J. Donald (Kriyananda).  The Essence of Self-Realization:The Wisdom of Paramahansa Yogananda.  Nevada City, CA: Crystal Clarity Publishers, 1990.


Still Funmy After All These Years




 
The Hollywood Squares
These answers from the days when Hollywood Squares was not scripted. Peter Marshall, the host, asked the questions. Thanks to Carl  and Classic Squares


Q. True or False, a pea can last as long as 5,000 years.
A. George Gobel: Boy, it sure seems that way sometimes.

Q. You've been having trouble going to sleep. Are you probably a man or a woman?

A. Don Knotts: That's what's been keeping me awake.


Q. As you grow older, do you gesture more or less with your hands when talking?
A. Rose Marie: You ask me one more growing old question, Peter, and I'll give you a gesture you'll never forget
! 

Q. Paul, what is a good reason for pounding meat?
A. Paul Lynde : Loneliness!

Q.
If you're going to make a parachute jump, how high should you be?
A. Charley Weaver: Three days of steady drinking should do it.


Q. According to Cosmopolitan, if you meet a stranger at a party and you think he's attractive, is it okay to ask if he is married?
 
A. Rose Marie: No wait until morning.

Q. Which of your five senses tends to diminish as you get older?
 
A. Charley Weaver: My sense of decency.

Q. What are 'Do It,' 'I Can Help,' and 'I Can't Get Enough'?
A. George Gobel: I don't know, but it's coming from the next apartment.

Q. Paul, why do Hell's Angels wear leather?
A. Paul Lynde: Because chiffon wrinkles too easily.

Q. In bowling, what's a perfect score?
A. Rose Marie: Ralph, the pin boy.

Q. It is considered in bad taste to discuss two subjects at nudist camps. One is politics, what is the other?
 A. Paul Lynde: Tape measures.

Q. During a tornado, are you safer in the bedroom or in the closet?
 A. Rose Marie: Unfortunately, Peter, I'm always safe in the bedroom.

Q. Can boys join the Camp Fire Girls?
A. Marty Allen: Only after lights out.

Q. When you pat a dog on its head he will wag his tail. What will a goose do?
A. Paul Lynde: Make him bark?

Q. If you were pregnant for two years, what would you give birth to?
A. Paul Lynde: Whatever it is, it would never be afraid of the dark.

Q. According to Ann Landers, is there anything wrong with getting into the habit of kissing a lot of people?
A. Charley Weaver: It got me out of the army.

Q.
It is the most abused and neglected part of your body, what is it?
A. Paul Lynde: Mine may be abused, but it certainly isn't neglected.

Q.
Back in the old days, when Great Grandpa put horseradish on his head, what was he trying to do?
A. George Gobel: Get it in his mouth.

Q. Who stays pregnant for a longer period of time, your wife or your elephant?
A. Paul Lynde: Who told you about my elephant?


Q. When a couple has a baby, who is responsible for its sex?

A. Charley Weaver: I'll lend him the car, the rest is up to him

Q. Jackie Gleason recently revealed that he firmly believes in them and has actually seen them on at least two occasions. What are they? 

A. Charley Weaver: His feet.

Q.
According to Ann Landers, what are two things you should never do in bed?
 A. Paul Lynde: Point and laugh






Machiavelli Personality Test



So, what's your Mach score?

Help me get blog-thing rolling & post your score or whatever below as a comment. Thanks!

Machiavelli personality test

This survey at Salon.com has 20 questions, takes 2-5 minutes: "Range is 1-100.  Most fall somewhere in the middle, but there's a significant minority at either extreme."  Survey says:

This survey itself measures only one thing -- whether you subscribe to the ideas of a 16th century Italian political philosopher. But experiments have shown that reactions to Machiavelli act as a kind of litmus test, delineating differences in temperament that can be confirmed with more traditional personality inventories.

High Machs constitute a distinct type: charming, confident and glib, but also arrogant, calculating and cynical, prone to manipulate and exploit.

(Think Rupert Murdoch, or if your politics permit it, President Clinton.)

True low Machs, however, can be kind of dependent, submissive and socially inept. So be sure to invite a high Mach or two to your next dinner party.

On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 8:41 AM, Chris wrote:

I just finished your 'Bama article on Clark-Works.  I've read bits and pieces on Facebook and through email, but the completed article is truly fantastic.  Powerful and well written, dear Clark.  I'm so impressed with your writing skills and powers of observation on the world around us, and honored to be your friend.

-Chris
Chris, you are clearly the one to blame for this!  You didn't think I would fail to exploit this compliment, did you.  What, me a "high Mach" scoring 62?  Think again, boyo!
 
Seriously, I've let this blog linger on a dusty desuetude for a year or so now.  Maybe I can do something with it.  The idea is to have fun.

So g'ahead.  Be the first second Clark-Works Commenter ever!  (Who copped firsties as the one and only "Anonymous Commenter" to appear at Clark-Works?   You get 62 guesses.)






 

Sunday, December 13, 2009

Sunday Onanism (A work in progress)

BEGUN: Sunday 13 December 2:30am CST
==========================


A patented device designed to prevent masturbation by inflicting electric shocks upon the perpetrator, by ringing an alarm bell, and through spikes at the inner edge of the tube into which the penis is inserted. (2)






Yup, you read it right: Sunday Onanisim!

I just had to steal this from a great blog written by a great friend. C2C, you know who you are!

Anybody here know what Onanism means? Raise your hands!

Yes, you little Johnny, in the back of the class ... Well yes, Onanism does means masturbation. That's the usual definition. Let's learn more!

It's time for for our friend, Mr. Wikipedia. I want you to type in Onanism (this will open in a new tab or window). What do you see?

 

 Masturbation, 1911, copper engraving by Mihály Zichy.




Self-portrait of Egon Schiele 1911,
depicting masturbation. (4)



Oh my!




 Masturbation was depicted in 19th century Shunga

prints, such as this piece by Kunisada. (6)

 

This is Wikipedia? 






Gustav Klimt's "A Young Woman Masturbating" (1916)


Well, it is artistic—wait, what's this?







Masturbate-a-thon. (7)



Longest time:

  • Female: 7 h, 6 min (Ms. Kitty Kat, San Francisco, 2008)
  • Male: 9 h, 58 min (Masanobu Sato, visiting from Tokyo, Japan and representing the Tenga company; San Francisco, 2009)
Most orgasms:
  • Male: 31 (Michael Hariprem in 2008)
  • Female: 94 (Pernille from Copenhagen, Denmark in 2008)
You say there are more photos, little Johnny? No, children, don't scroll around the page! Stop laughing, little Johnny! 

Sally, stop crying! 

All right, turn off your laptops right now!

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

We're all adults here, right? At least old enough to read Wikipedia. So let's talk. First, a show of hands. Anybody here not guilty of committing the sin of Onan? Raise your hands. Both hands! Not you, Miss Sally? Nor you, Mr John? And how old are you now? Sixty? You're sure you have never masturbated, not once in your whole life? That's not a sin, but it is a shame. I mean, it's nice to be a virgin when you are sixteen, but when you're sixty?

All right let's try this one more time. Back to Wikipedia. Now take the jism - make that ism - out of Onanism. This time Search Wikipedia for Onan. See? That's the one we're looking for.

A lot of you already knew about the Genesis 38 story of (disambiguated) Onan, son of Judah, younger brother to Er, elder brother of Shelah. Onan was a middle child. So Judah finds a wife marries off his firstborn son, Er, to Tamar. So far so good, but it doesn't work out for Er and Tamar because Er "was wicked in the sight of the Lord, and the Lord Killed him." Dang! Judah needs and heir, because in Genesis, it's being fruitful and multiplying. If you don't do a lot of begetting and begatting, in Genesis you just won't make the cut. Sorry, but that's the law, and not too bad a law when you think of it, especially given the name of the book. Come on, it's about genesis, not genius! So Judah sends in his back-up son, and says to Onan. “Go in to your brother’s wife and marry her, and raise up an heir to your brother.”

This doesn't sit well with Onan. Why? Well, Genesis may be all about begetting, but having heirs means having more than just you name on the Big List of begetters. Marriage also means combining the wealth of two families, having land and power. So to have an heir is to have an asset - free labor till he or she is married off, a valuable trading opportunity when it's time for marriage, and after marriage, children and grandchildren to look after you, the patriarch or you, the matriarch. Okay, so the Mom's deal is more about derived power, and from the time of Genesis, it is through the mother that one's lineage is traced. Why? Simple. Because there is no doubt about who one's mother is, Nature takes care of that. But one's father? Before DNA testing, who knew? So that's still the way it is today in Judaism (hey look, Judah gets to have his name associated with a major world religion!).

But wait, there's a problem. Here's what Genesis tells us: "Onan knew that the heir would not be his; and it came to pass, when he went in to his brother’s wife, that he emitted on the ground, lest he should give an heir to his brother. And the thing which he did displeased the LORD; therefore He killed him also." Dang! Exit Onan. He emitted, the Lord omitted. Bang, zoom, gone! But Onan left us with one thing, which we all still practice today. All? Pretty much. Even him? Even her? Yup. You too. Remember, both hands!

An aside - so what happened next? Any writer would see this coming. I mean, why bring up Shelah, the third brother, and leave him waiting in the wings if he isn't going to get in on the action? And so it was. But Tamar has to wait, since Shelah's only a child. And anyway, Judah wasn't so hot about sending in his final son to this hottie Tamar, a proven man-killer, “Lest he also die like his brothers.” So Tamar has to "live like a widow," the Bible reports. Lots of drama, about goats and pledges and mistaken identities, harlots, Tamar almost getting burned alive, but it all ends up with Tamar having sex with old Judah - and twin sons, Zarah who got to be the eldest only because he stuck out his hand before being born and had a scarlet thread tied around his wrist by the midwife, and Pharez or Perez, who became King David, an ancestor of Jesus Christ.

Tamar is a healthy young woman, and then, like now, healthy young women are not supposed to be interested in sex. They have to be chaste and virginal and all that. Wars have been launched over the matter of virginity and progeny. Male apes will bust any other male ape who messes with his womenfolk. Same goes for us, it seems. Whether it's Helen or Mary or Draupadi or Sita, you just don't mess with another man's wife (except in the curious case of Mary, who gets to have a lover named God, and also gets to stay a virgin - we're serious about this. Really serious! No mocking, Mister). So what if Joseph is made a cuckold by God himself. Tough, man. Good enough for Zeus, good enough for our Father in Heaven, hallowed art thou! (Watch it, Mister. This is getting close to blasphemy. We may have to do the Lord's work on you, and you don't want that, do you, not after reading Genesis.)

Okay, let's drop that and get back to Onan. (Watch out, buddy. We mean it.) Okay, let's talk about Onan as a metaphor then. How like Onan, we can shoot our wad (watch it!) -- okay, how we can waste our God-Given Gift, our GGG, whatever it may be, or at least not let them be fruitful and multiply. So we come, to coin a phrase, to this Note, and to my habitual scribbling on sheets or paper or in emails stuff that at one time I used to publish. What am I doing? Hand over heart, I am trying my best. Plus I like to write this way, without any pressure, fear of censorship, money to be made, deadlines to be hit. Just to write, for me to you, from one friend to another. Or if I have no one to write to or no reason to wtie, thne just to write in a journal. Dabbled in blogs, but like emails better, or comments on Facebook, or in certain internet forums. These things are kind of transitory and ephemeral, but I like that part too.

However, lately I have been writing a lot of emails, posting in a lot of blogs, writing Notes and comments hither and yon. And I find I am cutting and pasting from one email to another, or to a blog, or from a blog-post to a Note. As ideas begin to percolate, then cool and condense fro fragments and snippets into complete thoughts, it becomes necessary to put those pieces together into a more finished form, to clear the decks so you can move on.

Take this Note, for instance. It began in an email to a friend, continued as a comment to a Facebook post by Nina Snowden about her first novel, In and Out of Madness, about which Nina added a new comment yesterday on her Facebook profile:


My book, In and Out of Madness, deals with sexual addiction....the same illness that Tiger Woods has. No one has written about it in fiction, only nonfiction. Tiger has put this on the national radar. Not only does my book entertain, but it educates as well. I did a lot of research on the illness before I wrote the book.

There was already a string of comments when I added my own"


Nina, you just made a sale, dammit! When the movie comes out, I wouldn't need to use the Mehod to play both roles - the bipolar woman and the sex-addict she married. In fact, I was just writing about Sex and God: "Remember, the lowest ,chakras and the highest ones are both in overdrive in the devil-saints! Even the great sages and avatars - and yes, even Him, and even our Mother Mary - we puritans have a hard time thinking of them as human men and human women with our human flaws and urges. Hey, maybe to some I am the ishta-deva, but here on earth I am a man! My guru in India whispered to me in private, "Clark, show me a saint who doesn't get an erection, and I'll show you a saint who is worth much!" Sex and God keep little company in the religious mind and our hopeless division of the two. It's a shame - God was no fool when He and/or She made two sexes! Just my opinion. Watch out for lightening bolts!

Then Polly made a comment:


Ummmmmm....I don't think religion makes a natural instinct a sin....I think God makes lack of control of our natural instincts a sin.

Then Nina:


What about the elderly who have a natural instinct to void but lose control and need depends....they can't control that natural instinct. There are many instances where natural instincts are hard to impossible to control. So, I guess we can't make a definitive blanket statement about instincts, control, and sin. None of us. Just a thought.

To which Polly replied.


That's not a choice.

And I chimed in again.


Polly, I agree with your point. Both of them: (1) placing a premium on balance and moderation, not being enslaved to one's emotions and drives, and (2) that this premium applies in those cases in which one's will or choice is not impaired, which would cover probably 95-99% of us (note: I am not a statistics person, but you get the idea.) Personally, I am not comfortable with the sentence called "sin" (not the word, the sentence - think on it).

I was a religion major at Vanderbilt and learned Greek so I could read the koine Greek of the New Testament. We also wrestled with a definition (not academic, not etymological, but practical) for "religion." I was, by accident of geography, born and borne into the world as a Christian, albeit a rather bland Methodist. I set out in earnest on my spiritual journey when I was 17, after a high school summer job as a Merchant Marine took me to Vietnam. Won't go into detail here, other than to say that I am still on this journey. Always will be, I suppose.

"Sin" in English carries such stern baggage! It is the way of religion, versus the way or spirituality, perhaps. I lean more toward the less judgmental and guilt-laden notion of the Buddhists, who speak of "mistakes" and "ignorance" rather than "sins." Actually, this is more in line with the New Testament. The koine (common) Greek of the Bible for sin is hamartia (ἁμαρτία) and what we call "sin" in the original means "to miss the mark." Paul was a scholar, he knew this: "for all have fallen short of the glory of theos" he wrote.

As a sentence, the verdict of sin is awfully strong. No arguing with such a sentence. And we all know what the "wages" of "sin" are! Death to you! To Hell with you! Or else: Accept your pardon - your ONLY pardon. Or ELSE! Isn't it? Be honest, is this not the bailiwick of "religion" and the twin weapons of religion: Fear of hell and hope of heaven, delivered in absolutist terms. Such intolerance is nowhere in the original New Testament, and certainly not in John or the Epistles of John, which border on heresy if you read the original! "Heresy," my wise Baptist preacher pointed out, with his usual humor, "is what other people believe!" Best definition ever!

I won't go into the beginnings of body-hatred, given a big boost by Paul, of puritanism, etc. - just think in terms of natural, loving, body-positive, healthy sex - as for me and my house, I say yum yum! (If you know the Vedas, you can say yab-yum, yin-yang). In short, where religion ends, spirituality begins. And the beginning of spirituality? Tolerance.

This is my view; maybe I am wrong. "Maybe I am wrong" is a phrase one seldom hears from a religious person, but I mean this sincerely - after my long long long pilgrimage I know this for sure: No one path, no single person can encompass all truth, all the great mystery, of the mind of God. Big Mind is beyond any concepts of Little Mind, and the variety of pronouncements about Big Mind coming from this little planet must cause Big Laughter.

So far, so good. It's now Sunday at 5:15am, so that's where we'll leave this. Now I can rest. Like God intended.

===========================

All Photos and Reproductions here are from Wikimedia Commons

(1) This image (or other media file) is in the public domain because its copyright has expired. This applies to the United States, Australia, the European Union and those countries with a copyright term of life of the author plus 70 years.

(2) In general, the contents of United States patents are in the public domain. In specific cases, patent applicants and holders may claim copyright in portions of those documents. In those specific cases, applicants are required to identify the portions that are protected under copyright, and are additionally required to state the following within the body of the application and patent. A portion of the disclosure of this patent document contains material which is subject to (copyright or mask work) protection. The (copyright or mask work) owner has no objection to the facsimile reproduction by any­one of the patent document or the patent disclosure, as it appears in the Patent and Trademark Office patent file or records, but otherwise reserves all (copyright or mask work) rights whatsoever.

(3) Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this document under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 or any later version published by the Free Software Foundation; with no Invariant Sections, no Front-Cover Texts, and no Back-Cover Texts. A copy of the license is included in the section entitled "GNU Free Documentation License."

(4) The work of art depicted in this image and the reproduction thereof are in the public domain worldwide. The reproduction is part of a collection of reproductions compiled by The Yorck Project. The compilation copyright is held by Zenodot Verlagsgesellschaft mbH and licensed under the GNU Free Documentation License.

(5) The work of art depicted in this image and the reproduction thereof are in the public domain worldwide. The reproduction is part of a collection of reproductions compiled by The Yorck Project. The compilation copyright is held by Zenodot Verlagsgesellschaft mbH and licensed under the GNU Free Documentation License.

(6) This work is in the public domain in the United States, and those countries with a copyright term of life of the author plus 100 years or fewer.

(7) This image (or other media file) is in the public domain because its copyright has expired. This applies to the United States, Australia, the European Union and those countries with a copyright term of life of the author plus 70 years.