Thai Buddhism and Ordaining Women as Nuns.

The Bangkok Post, Dec 30, 2009

Bangkok, Thailand -- The forest monks of Wat Nong Pah Pong want the Council of Elders and the Office of National Buddhism to impose stricter controls on Western monks to stop them from ordaining women. They also want the properties of Thai temples in the West to come under the ownership of the Thai Sangha to ensure complete control. The monks are seeking the changes after the recent ordination of two women at Bodhinyana Temple, a branch of Wat Nong Pah Pong in Perth, Australia. The Ecclesiastic Council is opposed to female ordination. The Wat Nong Pah Pong clergy have excommunicated the dharma teacher Phra Brahmavamso, popularly known as Ajahn Brahm, for sponsoring the ordination.

They are also unhappy about alleged negative comments Ajahn Brahm has made about Thai clergy and Thai Buddhism in his talks overseas. If action is not taken, the council fears that more women could be ordained in the West. "Sooner or later, we'll see female monks everywhere," said Phra Kru Opaswuthikorn. He added that the introduction of the Siladhara order, or 10-precept nuns, which was set up by the most senior Western monk, Ajahn Sumedho, as an alternative to female monks in Thailand was also unthinkable. It would be difficult for the Thai public and the clergy to accept the Siladhara order, he said, because the presence of women creates unnecessary problems for the monks' vow of chastity.

James: I'm not a Theravada Buddhist or an ordained monk or teacher, nor am I a Thai. So I'll try to step lightly here and I hope I do not offend anyone. That said, I need to say something about this issue because it has bothered me for some time that there is still a taboo about ordaining women to be nuns in some Buddhist schools. Perhaps it's my western cultural influence but it seems antithetical to the accepting and open minded nature of Buddhism to deny women monastic status. One of the excuses used in this article and heard elsewhere is that having nuns around would tempt the monks too much. Well, monks need to learn how to master their desires regardless of whether women are physically present or not.

They can just as easily engage in sexual misconduct by masturbation or even sex with another monk. In addition, they are tempted with various other desires in their current situation with the temptation to lie or speak ill of a fellow monk or teacher. The desire for theft, anger or even murder can brew in any environment. And what do they do when they have to go out for their alms rounds and happen to see women? Do they run the other way? I'm not trying to mock these monks but I'm just really perplexed. Couldn't they see a women on their rounds and then go back to the monastery and masturbate while thinking about that woman?

We lay practitioners are surrounded much more by the opposite sex than monks and yet most of us are able to avoid sexual misconduct. So why can't monks resist? Isn't that part of their intensive training to learn how to avoid desire? Isn't it kind of impractical and discriminatory to basically say that the only way that this can be achieved is by denying women entrance to monasteries? In a way, it's a statement that men can't control themselves when around women and so women must be denied access to a deeper understanding of the Dharma. Why should women have to sacrifice a chance to learn the Dharma in a monastery simply because they were born with female body parts? And what does it say of men -- That we can't control ourselves enough to live around women without raping them or whatever the case may be? Isn't that kind of blaming the women for existing? Because if monks can't even resist sexual misconduct by even the sight of women then isn't that kind of a false sense of mastery of your desires? If the only way you can resist attaching to desire is to close yourself up in a box and avoid any contact with women then is that real mastery or one that was created by self-imposed isolation alone?

Another point is that despite some initial reluctance the Buddha himself set up orders for nuns (Bhikkunis). Also, other traditions have allowed the ordination for nuns (such as in my tradition of Vietnamese Zen master Thich Nhat Hanh) without any major, systemic problems. As well as Catholic nuns. The sexual temptation excuse seems to be a thin layer of justification covering a deeper issue of sexism. At least from my western perspective. As I said before, I'm not use to Thai culture so perhaps I'm missing something but if the Buddha himself established female orders then I have to question this reluctance by some in the Thai sangha.

What about setting up monasteries that are just for women? Wouldn't that work if the monks aren't willing to share a monastery with women? The only male could be the abbot and if he's older then his chances for a rampant sexual desire would be low. It just seems like there's another way than to just simply ban women from a chance for deeper study that is found in monastic settings. I hope I haven't offended anybody and if I have I sincerely apologize. I am honestly trying to figure out in my mind why this is happening and how we can achieve some kind of middle-ground. After all, Isn't treading the middle-ground the core of much of the Buddha's teachings?

If I'm missing something here please let me know. All thoughts and comments are welcome so long as you remain respectful of others.

---End of Transmission---

I Haven't Been Kidnapped.

I know I haven't been writing here much lately but it's not a permanent trend. I'm simply overloaded with holiday stuff and have been spending a lot of time with my family. The big thing though that has taken up most of my time is a new project I'm working on. It's a new blog but it has nothing to do with Buddhism -- well, it does but it's not the main theme there. I just wanted to write a quick note to let you know that I haven't abandoned you and I'm not getting bored with this blog. I'm just spreading myself too thin. After the first of the year I'll have stuff squared away and can devote more time here as I want to do. In the mean time, thanks for your patience. May this message find you well.

-James

~Peace to all beings~

Griffith Sides With Sarah Palin

Sarah Palin is on your team Parker, enjoy.

MSNBC: GOP Embraces Democratic Turncoat (Griffith)

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Hey The NRCC Got Something Right About Parker Griffith

I almost hate to admit it, and there premise is skewed, but the NRCC actually got something right:

The GOP Keeps At It

The Magic of Winter.

Snow descends upon Earth from the Buddha realms cascading softly to surround the bustling humanity in tranquility. Methodically it falls, bringing with it the silence of a morning meditation at a mountain temple. Winter offers the jewel of reflection, which allows us a vivid and stark yet peaceful reminder of impermanence. The snow doesn't ask why it falls or why it melts -- It is at peace being snow, water or vapor. May peace be upon you regardless of the moment.

~Peace to all beings~

Ivey On The Griffith Switch

Kay Ivey wasn't quite as accepting of Parker Griffith as her fellow GOPers:

"Political self-preservation isn't a virtue," Ivey said. "In fact, political expediency is an insult to every grassroots activist who commits untold hours in devotion to getting candidates elected."

According to party chair Joe Turnham, there may have been a little lifting of political information as Griffith departed:

A Huntsville firm that advises Griffith, Main Street Strategies, downloaded Democratic Party data from party computers even though he was going to the GOP, Democratic chairman Joe Turnham said in a statement."The Democratic Party has spent untold sums of money building good data for elections and we make that data available to our Democratic candidates and officeholders. Mr. Griffith's campaign benefited from this asset, and he wouldn't be a congressman today without it," said Turnham.

The Coming of the King

The Vatican Lobby will be taking a break until after the New Year unless major events dictate otherwise. In the meantime, I want to wish all of you a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year.

This is the time when we reflect on the simplicity of the Christmas story. God became flesh, and dwelt among us. His purpose? To demonstrate his love through death; to reconcile a lost race with its Creator through the shedding of his blood; and to prepare the hearts of men to one day receive the full coming of his earthly kingdom.

"Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven, given among men, whereby we must be saved." Acts 4:12.

I pray we all turn our attention to that night long ago, and ponder why that baby was born in the first place.

See you all in 2010!

Benedict Calls for a "Court of the Gentiles"

Near the end of his pre-Christmas message to the Roman Curia, Pope Benedict XVI outlined a startling new vision for the Roman Catholic church that seems destined to revolutionize the way the church does business with the secular world. Calling for the creation of a symbolic "court of the Gentiles," Benedict has basically authorized unbelievers and agnostics to have some kind of partial affiliation with the church without actually acknowledging the truth of Christianity. It is a very strange concession, but not altogether surprising given the Vatican's powerful desire to expand its authority over as many people as possible and to create a wide sphere of "authentic" Roman culture.

The following excerpt comes from Sandro Magister's website Chiesa, as translated by Matthew Sherry.
-----------------------------------------------------------

". . .Even the people who describe themselves as agnostics or atheists must be very important to us as believers. When we talk about a new evangelization, these people may become afraid. They do not want to see themselves as an object of mission, nor do they want to renounce their freedom of thought or of will. But the question about God nonetheless remains present for them as well, even if they cannot believe in the concrete nature of his attention to us. In Paris, I talked about the search for God as the fundamental motive from which Western monasticism was born, and with it, Western culture. As the first step in evangelization, we must try to keep this search alive; we must take pains that man not set aside the question of God as an essential question of his existence. Take pains that he accept this question and the longing concealed within it.

Here I am reminded of the words that Jesus quoted from the prophet Isaiah, that the temple should be a house of prayer for all peoples (cf. Isaiah 56:7; Mark 11:17). He was thinking about what was called the court of the gentiles, which he cleansed of extraneous business so that it could be the space available for the gentiles who wanted to pray to the one God there, even if they could not take part in the mystery, for service of which the interior of the temple was reserved. A place of prayer for all peoples: by this was meant the people who know God, so to speak, only from afar; who are dissatisfied with their gods, rites, myths; who desire the Pure and the Great, even if God remains for them the "unknown God" (cf. Acts 17:23). They needed to be able to pray to the unknown God, and so be in relation with the true God, although in the midst of obscurities of various kinds.

I think that the Church should also open today a sort of "court of the gentiles" where men can in some manner cling to God, without knowing him and before they have found the entryway to his mystery, which the interior life of the Church serves. To the dialogue with the religions it must above all add today a dialogue with those for whom religion is something foreign, to whom God is unknown, and who nonetheless would not like simply to remain without God, but at least to approach him as the Unknown. . ."

US Bishops:"Hold the Fort" on Health Care

Here is an update on the neverending health care debate. Despite some attempts at compromise, the Senate health care bill remains "fundamentally flawed" in the eyes of America's most powerful political lobby: the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops.

The following article highlights the bishops' latest statement on the bill. Having "lost" their main protagonist inside the Senate, Ben Nelson of Nebraska (see this article from Catholic Online about Nelson, a modern day "Judas"), the USCCB is lashing out in every direction trying to maintain its position of power over the health care debate. It appears that the Democrats have enough votes to pass the bill, but one never can be sure that the bishops won't figure out how to prevail.

This article comes from Catholic Culture.

The full letter from the bishops to the Senate can be found at the USCCB website.

------------------------------------------------------------

US Bishops: Oppose Senate Health Care Legislation Until Moral Deficiencies are Addressed

Denouncing current Senate health care legislation as deficient because it provides federal funding for abortions and leaves Catholic hospitals and physicians bereft of conscience protection, the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops emphasized in a December 22 letter that “until these fundamental flaws are remedied the bill should be opposed.”

The three coauthors of the letter-- Cardinal DiNardo of Galveston-Houston, Bishop William Murphy of Rockville Centre, and Bishop John Wester of Salt Lake City-- noted that the legislation

violates the longstanding federal policy against the use of federal funds for elective abortions and health plans that include such abortions -- a policy upheld in all health programs covered by the Hyde Amendment as well as in the Children’s Health Insurance Program, the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program -- and now in the House-passed “Affordable Health Care for America Act.” We believe legislation that fails to comply with this policy and precedent is not true health care reform and should be opposed until this fundamental problem is remedied.

Despite claims to the contrary, the House-passed provision on abortion keeps in place the longstanding and widely supported federal policy against government funding of elective abortions and plans that include elective abortions. It does not restrict abortion, or prevent people from buying insurance covering abortion with their own funds. It simply ensures that where federal funds are involved, people are not required to pay for other people’s abortions. The public consensus on this point is borne out by many opinion surveys, including the new Quinnipiac University survey of December 22 showing 72 percent opposed to public funding of abortion in health care reform legislation.

The abortion provisions in the Manager’s Amendment to the Senate bill do not maintain this commitment to the legal status quo on abortion funding. Federal funds will help subsidize, and in some cases a federal agency will facilitate and promote, health plans that cover elective abortions. All purchasers of such plans will be required to pay for other people’s abortions in a very direct and explicit way, through a separate premium payment designed solely to pay for abortion. There is no provision for individuals to opt out of this abortion payment in federally subsidized plans, so people will be required by law to pay for other people’s abortions. States may opt out of this system only by passing legislation to prohibit abortion coverage. In this way the longstanding and current federal policy universally reflected in all federal health programs, including the program for providing health coverage to Senators and other federal employees, will be reversed. That policy will only prevail in states that take the initiative of passing their own legislation to maintain it.

This bill also continues to fall short of the House-passed bill in preventing governmental discrimination against health care providers that decline involvement in abortion (Sec. 259 of H.R. 3962), and includes no conscience protection allowing Catholic and other institutions to provide and purchase health coverage consistent with their moral and religious convictions on other procedures.

The bishops also criticized the measure for failing to cover some immigrants, for leaving 23 million Americans uninsured, and for leaving some low-income families “financially vulnerable to health care costs.”

“Undocumented immigrants should not be barred from purchasing a health insurance plan with their own money,” the bishops added. “Without such access, many immigrant families would be unable to receive primary care and be compelled to rely on emergency room care. This would harm not only immigrants and their families, but also the general public health. Moreover, the financial burden on the American public would be higher, as Americans would pay for uncompensated medical care through the federal budget or higher insurance rates.”

“For many months, our bishops’ conference has worked with members of Congress, the Administration and others to fashion health care reform legislation that truly protects the life, dignity, health and consciences of all,” the bishops concluded. “Our message has been clear and consistent throughout. We regret to say that in all the areas of our moral concern, the Senate health care reform bill is deficient. On the issue of respect for unborn human life, the bill not only falls short of the House’s standard but violates longstanding precedent in all other federal health programs. Therefore we believe the Senate should not move this bill forward at this time but continue to discuss and approve changes that could make it morally acceptable. Until these fundamental flaws are remedied the bill should be opposed.”

UK Columnist: Global Governance Not a Rumor

As I have noted frequently during the past several months, the Vatican specifically wants to unite mankind under some form of global governance, and to subject that governance--no matter what its shape--under the sociocultural and spiritual authority of Rome. How exactly the Vatican plans to achieve this goal is hazy, but the goal itself is certain. The homilies, speeches, and messages of Pope Benedict XVI in 2009 have confirmed this beyond any doubt.

Although the article below is not directly concerned with the Vatican or the Roman Catholic church, I think its content is highly relevant to the mission of The Vatican Lobby. I have spoken often about the church's desire to create a worldwide utopia based on Catholic social teaching and I have posted numerous articles and speeches that confirm Rome's desire for global "solidarity." It is therefore logical to post this article containing a reasoned criticism of internationalism and to demonstrate to my readers that I am not the only person seeing an oncoming wave of global governance.

[For the record, let me clarify the relationship between the Vatican and the new international order very briefly:
1. The Vatican supports global governance very openly in its actions and its official statements.
2. Wielding a powerful combination of Catholic socialism and innovative "global theology," the Vatican provides the emerging world system with a spiritual dimension that, so far, that system has totally lacked. If global governance is the "new international order," then the Roman Catholic church is "new international church."
3. Using its unparalleled political and social clout in various countries and international bodies, the Vatican actively seeks to implement its agenda to the harm of national sovereignty.]

For further confirmation of the Vatican's global agenda, see these official statements from CIDSE, from devout Catholic EU President Herman van Rompuy, and of course from Pope Benedict XVI himself. (This last link, Benedict's encyclical "Caritas in veritate," contains no less than 54 uses of the word "global" and 50 uses of the world "international," in one cognate form or another.) There are many other statements and most can be found online. Several of them can be found on this blog under the tags "Global Governance" and "Catholic Socialism."

Daley's article, which has received thousands of hits online, can be found here.
-----------------------------------------------------------

There'll be nowhere to run from the new world government

By Janet Daley
Published: 7:24PM GMT 19 Dec 2009

There is scope for debate – and innumerable newspaper quizzes – about who was the most influential public figure of the year, or which the most significant event. But there can be little doubt which word won the prize for most important adjective. 2009 was the year in which "global" swept the rest of the political lexicon into obscurity. There were "global crises" and "global challenges", the only possible resolution to which lay in "global solutions" necessitating "global agreements". Gordon Brown actually suggested something called a "global alliance" in response to climate change. (Would this be an alliance against the Axis of Extra-Terrestrials?)

Some of this was sheer hokum: when uttered by Gordon Brown, the word "global", as in "global economic crisis", meant: "It's not my fault". To the extent that the word had intelligible meaning, it also had political ramifications that were scarcely examined by those who bandied it about with such ponderous self-importance. The mere utterance of it was assumed to sweep away any consideration of what was once assumed to be the most basic principle of modern democracy: that elected national governments are responsible to their own people – that the right to govern derives from the consent of the electorate.

The dangerous idea that the democratic accountability of national governments should simply be dispensed with in favour of "global agreements" reached after closed negotiations between world leaders never, so far as I recall, entered into the arena of public discussion. Except in the United States, where it became a very contentious talking point, the US still holding firmly to the 18th-century idea that power should lie with the will of the people.

Nor was much consideration given to the logical conclusion of all this grandiose talk of global consensus as unquestionably desirable: if there was no popular choice about approving supranational "legally binding agreements", what would happen to dissenters who did not accept their premises (on climate change, for example) when there was no possibility of fleeing to another country in protest? Was this to be regarded as the emergence of world government? And would it have powers of policing and enforcement that would supersede the authority of elected national governments? In effect, this was the infamous "democratic deficit" of the European Union elevated on to a planetary scale. And if the EU model is anything to go by, then the agencies of global authority will involve vast tracts of power being handed to unelected officials. Forget the relatively petty irritations of Euro‑bureaucracy: welcome to the era of Earth-bureaucracy, when there will be literally nowhere to run.

But, you may say, however dire the political consequences, surely there is something in this obsession with global dilemmas. Economics is now based on a world market, and if the planet really is facing some sort of man-made climate crisis, then that too is a problem that transcends national boundaries. Surely, if our problems are universal the solutions must be as well.

Well, yes and no. Calling a problem "global" is meant to imply three different things: that it is the result of the actions of people in different countries; that those actions have impacted on the lives of everyone in the world; and that the remedy must involve pretty much identical responses or correctives to those actions. These are separate premises, any of which might be true without the rest of them necessarily being so. The banking crisis certainly had its roots in the international nature of finance, but the way it affected countries and peoples varied considerably according to the differences in their internal arrangements. Britain suffered particularly badly because of its addiction to public and private debt, whereas Australia escaped relatively unscathed.

That a problem is international in its roots does not necessarily imply that the solution must involve the hammering out of a uniform global prescription: in fact, given the differences in effects and consequences for individual countries, the attempt to do such hammering might be a huge waste of time and resources that could be put to better use devising national remedies. France and Germany seem to have pulled themselves out of recession over the past year (and the US may be about to do so) while Britain has not. These variations owe almost nothing to the pompous, overblown attempts to find global solutions: they are largely to do with individual countries, under the pressure of democratic accountability, doing what they decide is best for their own people.

This is not what Mr Brown calls "narrow self-interest", or "beggar my neighbour" ruthlessness. It is the proper business of elected national leaders to make judgments that are appropriate for the conditions of their own populations. It is also right that heads of nations refuse to sign up to "legally binding" global agreements which would disadvantage their own people. The resistance of the developing nations to a climate change pact that would deny them the kind of economic growth and mass prosperity to which advanced countries have become accustomed is not mindless selfishness: it is proper regard for the welfare of their own citizens.

The word "global" has taken on sacred connotations. Any action taken in its name must be inherently virtuous, whereas the decisions of individual countries are necessarily "narrow" and self-serving. (Never mind that a "global agreement" will almost certainly be disproportionately influenced by the most powerful nations.) Nor is our era so utterly unlike previous ones, for all its technological sophistication. We have always needed multilateral agreements, whether about trade, organised crime, border controls, or mutual defence.

If the impact of our behaviour on humanity at large is much greater or more rapid than ever before then we shall have to find ways of dealing with that which do not involve sacrificing the most enlightened form of government ever devised. There is a whiff of totalitarianism about this new theology, in which the risks are described in such cosmic terms that everything else must give way. "Globalism" is another form of the internationalism that has been a core belief of the Left: a commitment to class rather than country seemed an admirable antidote to the "blood and soil" nationalism that gave rise to fascism.

The nation-state has never quite recovered from the bad name it acquired in the last century as the progenitor of world war. But if it is to be relegated to the dustbin of history then we had better come up with new mechanisms for allowing people to have a say in how they are governed. Maybe that could be next year's global challenge.

Griffith Turns Turncoat

Alabama Democrat Parker Griffith is officially announced that he has no principals and will become a Republican. We'll see how warm a welcome he gets:

Rep. Parker Griffith, an Alabama Democrat, announced today that he is switching parties and joining the ranks of the GOP. It is the latest in a string of bad electoral news for House Democrats following a series of recent retirement announcement by lawmakers in right-leaning districts. The departures have given Republicans greater opportunities to pick up seats in the mid-term elections next year.

See the link for a round-up of reactions.

"The Magician of Lhasa," a Book Review.

It is rare to find a book of fiction based on Buddhism and even rarer still to find one worthy of reading. Well, "The Magician of Lhasa" by David Michie. The first 50 pages are kind of slow but keep reading because after that the story explodes into an exciting, fascinating, mysterious, suspenseful literary ride. Upon receiving the book I was dreading to hear how Buddhism would be presented and used in a novel as in the past many fiction writers have badly misrepresented Buddhist philosophy.

However, this books does a pretty good job of staying true to the teachings while offering up just enough mystery to keep you turning the pages. The book not only does a good job of explaining the Dharma it also teaches actual, helpful, applicable lessons mixed in with a entertaining story. What more could you want in a book? I don't want to say much more for fear of spoiling the secrets and plot of the book but It's a very fun book to read and suggest it highly. It is as good as any Dan Brown novel and I'd say is actually better than Brown's current book, "The Lost Symbol." I give "The Magician of Lhasa" a 9 out of 10 stars -- 10 being best.

~Peace to all beings~

"The Novice," a Book Review.

Who amongst us hasn't fantasized about a spiritual pilgrimage to for secret, life-changing wisdom. It seems that many of us, (Westerners especially) come to Buddhism with wild imaginations of climbing the Himalayas to get enlightenment from a 200 year old monk. That was what author of "The Novice" Stephen Schettini seemed to set out looking for on his pilgrimage to the East -- mostly India.

He learned, like all of us must at some point that Buddhism can be practiced anywhere in the world and that practicing it in the historical heart of the religion doesn't necessarily give ones Dharma practice an advantage. He also reminds us that Buddhism isn't always perfect or immediate in showing results. It's very much a book about not expecting Buddhism to immediately change your life. The story is mostly a coming of age story of a young man living during the first Buddhist boom in the West during the 60s and 70s. It was a chaotic, exciting and confusing time for Westerners studying a religion that was very new in their culture and reading about it is a fascinating view into the early days of Western Buddhism.

Reading about his travels on the way to India are just as interesting as his time training in the monasteries. He has some unique and curious stories to tell as he goes from Europe to Turkey to Iran to Afghanistan to Pakistan and then into India herself. It is fascinating to read about the people he meets along the way and how he views the cultures that he comes into contact with. He traveled very light and with little concern for safety, which would be near impossible today. As you read the book you can't help but feel a pull toward desiring your own adventurous journey to personally meet the world. It is a serious book reflecting on the difficulties of this life and the struggles we have in seeking to liberate ourselves from suffering, which is often done in humorous ways throughout the book.

It's a fast and interesting read with the exception on the long, drawn out description at the beginning of the book about the author's childhood. Though even that had some funny, interesting spots. I just think it could be a bit shorter as I wanted more written about the actual monk hood period but that's a minor quibble with an otherwise interesting book. I'd highly recommend this book for anyone interesting in reading first hand experiences of Westerners discovering Buddhism. I give it a 7.5 out of 10 -- Ten being best.

---End of Transmission---

Happy Belated Winter Solstice to my Pagan Friends.

Yesterday, December 21st is winter solstice, otherwise known as Midwinter. This is the shortest day and longest night of the year, which is the last blast of darkness before the sun rises slowly but surely to offer longer and longer days and increased sunlight. So it is a day of rebirth, which is very much in-line with Buddhist beliefs. I welcome the suns rebirth with great happiness. So, Happy Solstice everyone!!

PHOTO CREDIT: Winter Solstice occurring at Stonehenge in Great Britain.

~Peace to all beings~

Just To Cool For School

Times To End Sunday Paper

For all the GOPer's who read it, the Washington Times will stop serving you on Sunday. Ironic, isn't it? The paper founded by the Rev. Sun Myung Moon, won't be operating on Sunday:

The newspaper made the announcement Monday, saying it will produce Monday through Friday editions that focus on its "distinctive news and opinion content."

The new print edition will be sold for $1 at retail outlets and newspaper boxes in the Washington area. The current weekday edition is 50 cents and Sunday's paper costs $1.

Hackers Compete

Yet Another Abbot Asked to Expel Thich Nhat Hanh Monastics.

(Vietnamese Zen Master Thich Nhat Hanh -- Pictured above with brown robe showing)

James: As many know, monastics in the tradition of Vietnamese Zen Master Thich Nhat Hanh were forcefully removed from Bat Nha monastery in Vietnam by the communist government and local mobs. However, communist dictatorships are historically notorious for staging mob riots by secret police dressed in plain clothes to appear as peasants. The government claims the abbot of the monastery was the one who initiated the demand for expulsion, however, he has yet to say anything publicly about it. Another favorite trick of communist dictatorships is to force people into saying things via threats of violence or imprisonment if they refuse. Anyway, this expulsion took place this past October, which suspiciously came soon after Nhat Hanh called for Vietnam to be more open about religious freedoms. Following the expulsion the monastics fled to a pagoda whose abbot had invited them to take refuge within but now they are being pressured to leave there as well. This time the abbot is speaking out and confirming suspicions that the initial abbot was pressured.

Vietnamese authorities have ordered the abbot of a pagoda to evict some 190 members of an unofficial Buddhist group who had taken refuge there, the abbot said Monday. "They asked me to evict the nuns and monks from the pagoda before December 31," said abbot Thich Thai Thuan of Thuoc Hue pagoda, in the south-central province of Lam Dong. Thuan said he had met Friday with Duong Van Vien, deputy chair of the People's Committee in the town of Bao Loc, and Nguyen Thanh Tich, head of the religious committee. Last week a mob of some 100 people surrounded Phuoc Hue pagoda for three days. The mob attempted to prevent a fact-finding delegation of EU diplomats from visiting the abbot on Wednesday. "I have no choice but to sign a document saying the pagoda will ask the nuns and monks to leave," Thuan said. "If I don't ask them to leave, [the mob] will carry me away too."

James: They can push Buddhism outside the confines of Vietnam but they can't push Buddhism from the hearts of the people. Nor will they ever be able to fully crush Thich Nhat Hanh's influence in that country. Their fight against spiritual freedom and freedom in general is like trying to prevent a dam from breaking by putting your finger in a crack that opened. The artificial barrier might hold up for awhile but after years of pressure they can't keep up with all the fissures and cracks forming throughout the obstacle. Change always finds a way through any barrier -- just not always in the time frame that we might desire. The time will come when the Communists will no longer be able to hold back the people. That especially goes for online access to information that is pouring through the cracks appearing in that country's internet dam. Information is power and will quite likely, eventually be the catalyst of liberation for the people of Vietnam. May it happen in our lifetime.

~Peace to all beings~

Migliore Wants "Ecological Conversion"

Here is the formal speech delivered at Copenhagen by the Vatican's representative to the UN, Archbishop Celestino Migliore. Like other recent speeches emanating from Rome, this one contains a utopian gospel of eco-theology, social solidarity, and unabashed global governance.

It can be found on the Caritas blog.

-----------------------------------------------------------

Copenhagen Summit: Holy See Statement

By Archbishop Celestino Migliore, Apostolic Nuncio, Head of the Holy See Delegation

This conference reiterates how long it takes to create the clear and firm political will necessary to adopt common binding measures and adequate budgets for an effective mitigation and adaptation to ongoing climate change.

Is this political will slow in taking shape due to the complexity of the interlinking issues that we must tackle? Is it mainly a problem of conflicting national interests? Or is it the difficulty in translating into numbers the by-now acquired principle of common and differentiated responsibility? Or is it still the predominance of energy policies over care of the environment? Undoubtedly, there is a little of all of this.

However, it should be noted how the many considerations that are being developed during this process converge on a central aspect: the necessity of a new and deeper reflection on the meaning of the economy and its purposes, and a profound and far-reaching revision of the model for development, to correct the malfunctions and distortions. This, in fact, is required by the good ecological health of the planet and especially as an urgent response to the cultural and moral crisis of man, whose symptoms have long been evident all over the world.

With realism, trust and hope we must assume the new responsibilities which call us to the scene of a world in need of a deep cultural renewal and a rediscovery of fundamental values on which to build a better future. The moral crises that humanity is currently experiencing, be they economic, nutritional, environmental, or social – all deeply interlinked – oblige us to redesign our way, to establish new guidelines and to find new forms of engagement. These crises become thus the occasion for discernment and new thinking.

Obviously, this obligation requires the collection of detailed and accurate scientific analysis to help avoid the anxieties and fears of many and the cynicism and indifference on the part of others. It also requires the responsible involvement of all segments of human society to search for and discover an adequate response to the tangible reality of climate change. If the diagnosis – by force of circumstances in the hands of science, information and politics – finds it difficult to provide clarity and to motivate the concerted and timely action of those responsible for human society, reason and the innate sense of shared responsibility of the people once again must prevail.

Civil society and local authorities did not wait for the expected political and legally binding conclusions of our meetings, which take such an incredibly long time. Instead, individuals, groups, local authorities and communities have already begun an impressive series of initiatives to give form to the two cornerstones of the response to climate change: adaptation and mitigation. While technical solutions are necessary, they are not sufficient. The wisest and most effective programs focus on information, education, and the formation of the sense of responsibility in children and adults towards environmentally sound patterns of development and stewardship of creation.

These initiatives have already started to build up a mosaic of experiences and achievements marked by a widespread ecological conversion. These new attitudes and behaviors have the potential to create the necessary intra-generational and inter-generational solidarity and dispel any sterile sense of fear, apocalyptic terror, overbearing control and hostility towards humanity that are multiplied in media accounts and other reports.

The Holy See, in the albeit small state of Vatican City, also is making significant efforts to take a lead in environmental protection by promoting and implementing energy diversification projects targeted at the development of renewable energy, with the objective of reducing emissions of CO2 and its consumption of fossil fuels.

In addition, the Holy See is giving substance to the necessity to disseminate an education in environmental responsibility, which also seeks to safeguard the moral conditions for an authentic human ecology. Many Catholic educational institutions are engaged in promoting such a model of education, both in schools and in universities. Moreover, Episcopal Conferences, Dioceses, parishes and faith-based NGOs have been devoted to advocacy and management of ecological programs for a number of years.

These efforts are about working on lifestyles, as the current dominant models of consumption and production are often unsustainable from the point of view of social, environmental, economic and even moral analysis. We must safeguard creation – soil, water and air – as a gift entrusted to everyone, but we must also and above all prevent mankind from destroying itself. The degradation of nature is directly connected to the culture that shapes human coexistence: when the human ecology is respected within society, the environmental ecology will benefit. The way humanity treats the environment influences the way it treats itself.

In his recent encyclical Caritas in veritate and World Day of Peace Message 2010 Pope Benedict XVI addressed to all those involved in the environmental sector an inescapable question: how can we hope that future generations respect the natural environment when our educational systems and laws do not help them to respect themselves?

Environment and climate change entail a shared responsibility toward all humanity, especially the poor and future generations.

There is an inseparable link between the protection of creation, education and an ethical approach to the economy and development. The Holy See hopes that the process in question can ever more appreciate this link and, with this outlook, continues to give its full cooperation.

Given before the plenary of the High-Level Segment of the United Nations Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen, 17 December 2009

Merry Christmas

Nonsuch HP would like to wish everyone a Merry Christmas and a very happy new year. If you would like to learn more about the history of Christmas and its traditions, check out the History Channel's website, which includes information on subjects as diverse as the Christmas Truce during World War 1, the Roman celebrations of Saturnalia which were "adapted" by the Christian church to mark the birth of Jesus, and the story of Rudolph, who is 70 years old this year!

Pope Prophesies Universal "New Beginning"

Today, Pope Benedict XVI received eight new ambassadors to the Vatican with a message emphasizing the church's desire for "profound change" in the international order.

The full text of the speech can be found here (French).

These excerpts come from the Vatican Information Service.

-----------------------------------------------------------

RELIGIONS ARE A FORCE FOR PEACE AND RECONCILIATION

VATICAN CITY, 17 DEC 2009 (VIS) - Today in the Vatican, the Holy Father received the Letters of Credence of eight new ambassadors to the Holy See: Hans Klingenberg of Denmark; Francis K. Butagira of Uganda; Suleiman Mohamad Mustafa of Sudan; Elkanah Odembo of Kenya; Mukhtar B. Tileuberdi of Kazakhstan; Abdul Hannan of Bangladesh; Alpo Rusi of Finland, and Einars Semanis of Latvia.

Addressing the diplomats as a group, the Pope referred to the need for "a just relationship between human beings and the creation in which they live and work" In this context, he underlined the need for "environmental responsibility" because "the continual degradation of the environment constitutes a direct threat to man's survival and his development, and threatens peace among individuals and peoples".

Benedict XVI encouraged the political authorities of the countries the ambassadors represent, and those of all nations, "not only to increase their efforts in favour of environmental protection but also - since the problem cannot be faced only at the national level - to produce proposals and provide encouragement in order to reach vital international agreements that may prove useful and just for all sides".

After then highlighting the importance of "converting or modifying the current development model of our societies", the Pope pointed out that "the Church proposes that this profound change ... be guided by the notion of the integral development of the human person".

"If it is true", said the Holy Father, "that over history religions have often been a factor of conflict, it is also nonetheless true that religions lived according to their profound essence have been, and still are, a force for reconciliation and peace. At this moment in history religions must, through open and sincere dialogue, seek the path of purification in order to conform ever more closely to their true vocation".

"Peaceful coexistence of different religions in each nation is sometimes difficult", he continued. "More than a political problem, this co-existence is a religious problem which lies within the bosom of each one of those traditions. Believers are called to ask God about His will concerning each human situation".

"For people of faith or people of good will, the resolution of human conflicts and the delicate coexistence of different religious expressions can be transformed into an opportunity for human coexistence within a social order full of goodness and wisdom, the origin and impulse of which lies in God. Such coexistence, respecting the nature of things and the inherent wisdom that comes from God, is called peace", said Pope Benedict.

"The peace we so long for will not come into being save by the joint action of individuals, who discover the true nature of God, and of leaders of civil and religious society who - respecting the dignity and faith of all people - know how to give religion its noble and authentic role in creating and perfecting the human person. This overall reworking, at once temporal and spiritual, will enable a new beginning towards the peace that God wishes to be universal".

Help the Vietnamese Zen Monks of Bat Nha Monastery.

James: Please write your leaders to urge them in assisting the violently oppressed Vietnamese monks who follow in the tradition of Thich Nhat Hanh at Bat Nha monastery in that Southeast Asian country. They seek temporary asylum until they can return to their beloved, beautiful homeland. May their pure wish to peacefully practice the Dharma be fulfilled. Svaha!!

~Peace to all beings~

Catholic Socialism: Briefly Defined

A faithful reader of The Vatican Lobby has requested that I briefly explain what I mean by "Catholic socialism." This reader feels that pushing these two terms together is oxymoronic, and he is certain that the Roman Catholic church expressly condemns all tenets of socialism. And he is not alone in thinking this way. Many Catholics believe as such, and they believe it because the church has said so numerous times.

Clever wordplay, however--as I have stated often--easily obscures the truth.

Socialism, as the word is commonly used today, usually implies some kind of belief in a "community of goods." It traditionally refers (especially in America) to Soviet-style Communism founded upon the atheistic thought of Marx, Engels, Lenin, and Stalin. The Catholic church has indeed spoken out against this ideology for more than a century, rightly condemning its godless and backward reasoning as destructive to humanity. However, this opposition to atheistic Communism by no means precludes the church from endorsing "Catholic social teaching" or what I like to call "Catholic socialism."

This unique ideology was born in an encyclical drafted by Pope Leo XIII in 1891 called Rerum Novarum ("On New Things"). In this document, which was distributed to bishops and congregations all over the world, Leo XIII addressed the condition of exploited workers and challenged the atheistic social model that was then sweeping across Europe with a social model of his own.

Rerum Novarum was immensely influential. It provided opponents of Marxism with a fully thought-out schema for organizing social and economic relations under a Christian regime. It marked the beginning of the so-called social gospel--that is, a move away from spreading only the news of "Jesus Christ and him crucified" to spreading the news of a Christian-esque political system--leading to the formation of the mighty Christian Democrat parties of Europe. In the end, Leo's encyclical expanded Christianity from being merely a spiritual message with a limited role in secular society to being a social system equipped to regulate all aspects of human existence. Several likeminded encyclicals appeared over the next hundred years, reaffirming and clarifying Leo XIII original vision. Together, these "social encyclicals" comprise the official body of Catholic social teaching.

TENETS

So what is this teaching all about?

Below I have listed and briefly described a few main tenets that more or less make up the doctrines of Catholic socialism:

• Human Dignity

The Catholic church believes that each person is unique and possessed of a soul that intrinsically matters in the overall scheme of things. Of course, it is difficult to deny the truth of this statement or to resist it in any way. All human beings do matter.

• Solidarity and subsidiarity

The church believes that human society should be built on a model of solidarity--that is, on the notion that each human being does not live in isolation but is dependent on and interwoven with the corporate whole of humanity.

The church also believes in the concept of subsidiarity--that affairs should be handled by the smallest or most localized authority first. The intervention of a centralized authority should only occur when no local authority is able to address the matter.

While this principle of subsidiarity fully comports with a federal system like the United States of America, the principle of solidarity--when put into practice--often results in a situation very much resembling the situation under communism. Since we are all "dependent" and interwoven" with each other, the church--and here, as always, there is some politburo, some hierarchy, some "boss" of the social order, regardless of the flowery rhetoric--politely orders that we distribute our excess to those in need.

Solidarity, to be blunt, completely (and intentionally) contradicts the American ideal of individual reward for individual work.

• Charity

This tenet is very vague, but it essentially holds that human beings should express love toward other human beings. The "in truth" that usually accompanies "charity" in formal documents qualifies this love as non-relativistic. Essentially, human beings are to love each other while still retaining a fixed position of truth.

Benedict XVI has given this tenet special prominence throughout his pontificate.

• Distributism

This idea is somewhat convoluted but I will do my best to explain it here. Basically, the idea is that all the citizens of a state (or other social entity) should equally own/control the means of production. This would include land, machinery, and tools, but it would not include the actual capital used to produce goods.

In proposing this idea, the church attempts to forge a "third way" between atheistic communism and unbridled capitalism. Hilaire Belloc, one of Catholicism's most rabid theorists, described the distributive idea more fully in his book The Servile State. The desire of Belloc and others like him was to return society to the pre-capitalistic days of medieval Europe, when distinguished and wealthy families built localized fiefdoms offering peasants a "cooperative" share in the family enterprise by allotting them land and right within that social order. The Roman Catholic church, of course, would provide the distributive world-system with the overarching "glue" needed to bind disparate economies together, as well the "lubricant" needed to make them cooperate in solidarity toward a common goal.

As one economist has put it, "Distributists refer to capitalism as 'neo-feudalism,' but in reality, what they propose is a return to pre-capitalistic, medieval life. Their antipathy for the division of labor—that basic Smithian principle that has brought so much prosperity to the world—is grounded in a Marxist understanding of 'worker alienation.' Indeed, distributism could be considered a kinder, gentler Communism, and we all know how well that worked." (See this article)

The distributist ideology is consciously socialist and anti-capitalist--that really goes without saying.

PROBLEMS

There are many day-to-day problems created by socialist ideology, all of which are well-known and none of which I care to dwell on here. The major problem with Catholic socialism, however, occurs when it meets globalization. As long as this ideology was limited to particular countries (most notably in Europe), there was not much Americans could say. But with the rise of international organizations and the Vatican's aggressive pelting of these organizations with arguments (disguised or undisguised) in favor of Catholic socialism, the situation becomes suddenly more serious.

Within the past two decades, the church has been consciously trying to forge a "new international order" (see John Paul II's World Day of Peace message, 2004) based on the tenets of Catholic socialism. This order uses the principles of human dignity--which are, by themselves, completely noble--to justify a grand coalition across national, ethnic, and religious boundaries in defense of "life." This order also uses the disparity between rich countries and poor countries to argue in favor of a "worldwide distribution of. . .resources." Most recently, this order has used the controversial climate crisis to justify a "global solidarity" (see Benedict XVI's World Day of Peace message, 2009) that, it is claimed, can "save humanity from. . .self-destruction" (see Benedict's message for 2010).

The church's ultimate goal is to unite the planet under the authority of Rome. People may think I am exaggerating in saying such a thing, but I urge my readers to think about it logically.

- The Vatican believes it is the world's only true spiritual capital--which of course gives it authority over all other spheres of human existence.

- The Vatican believes its message is the only message that will bring peace on earth (Pacem in terris, Pope John XXIII).

- The Vatican believes its duty is to "evangelize" the whole earth with this message, to bring its distinctive brand of social Christianity to all peoples and to thus reshape the contours of human relations.

- The Vatican believes that it will ultimately be successful, and that the whole earth--under the guiding hand of the Roman Catholic church--will eventually move into a messianic age distinguished by love and dignity for all.

CONCLUSION

This confluence between Catholic socialism and Rome's desire for global governance is the basis for my concern that the Vatican is "one of the most dangerous actors in world politics today." The fact that so many people are falling for this blended and innovative "gospel"--indeed, so many Americans--only aggravates my concern and causes me to post information on this blog every day in order to warn those who may not be aware.

[There is a whole separate Christian argument why Catholic socialism is wrong, but I will not go into detail here. Suffice to say, Christians are called to spread only the gospel of Christ's death and resurrection, and to wait patiently for the day when Jesus will establish His kingdom upon this earth with power. Until that day, according to the Bible, there will be no peace on earth. In fact, any claims to establish universal peace prior to the arrival of this kingdom are instantly suspect.]

I encourage my readers to go back through the archives of this blog--especially in the categories "Catholic Socialism," "Global Governance," and "Eco-Theology"--and to read the speeches and articles that I have posted over the past few months. Then venture outside this blog to read the many hundreds of other Catholic documents that speak to the topic (for one small example, see this 2009 policy paper released by CIDSE). Next, study the modern history of Europe, especially since World War II, and witness the practical results of policies promoted by Christian Democrats . Finally, compare the foundational aspects of American politics and economics with the Roman Catholic approach. You will find, I guarantee, that there is a stark difference between our model and the one preached by the Vatican.

If you are really diligent, go to this site and read all the speeches made by the Holy See's representatives to the United Nations. You will see immediately that the Vatican is not content to keep this ideology under a bushel, but is aggressively "evangelizing" the international community to accept it and implement it to the detriment of many.

Political X Factor?

Simon Cowell has been proposing a new programme which allows the public to debate and vote on important political issues, "in the style of the X Factor".

Is this workable? Watchable? Please let us know.

PS: Here is Cowell being interviewed on Newsnight discussing his ideas (plus his views on the war in Afghanistan and whether he would make "X Factor North Korea".

PPS: Here's The Guardian's view, comparing Cowell's ideas to the politics of Silvio Berlusconi.

Cardinal Praises Pope's "Cosmic Vision"

This partial excerpt from a National Catholic Register online article describes Cardinal Renato Martino underscoring the revolutionary content of Benedict's message for the World Day of Peace.

Once again, I have taken the liberty to mark up these comments in order to demonstrate to my readers the globalist, socialist, and spiritual intentions behind them.

The article can be found on the NCR website.
-----------------------------------------------------------

Pope's 'Cosmic Vision of Peace'

Posted by EDWARD PENTIN

Wednesday, December 16, 2009 11:29 AM

In his World Day of Peace Message for 2010, Pope Benedict XVI highlights the “urgent need” to protect the environment in order to cultivate peace, Cardinal Renato Martino said yesterday.

Releasing the message, with the theme “If You Want to Cultivate Peace, Protect Creation,” the outgoing president of the Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace said the Pope has presented a “cosmic vision of peace.”

The cardinal stressed the message “recalls the Church’s commitment to defending the Earth” and enumerates a series of “perspectives for the shared progress of humankind.” This series includes “a non-reductive vision of the nature of human beings,” a call to collective responsibility, and “a profound revision of development models.”

The Holy Father, he added, highlights the “urgent need for action,” although he “does not propose technical solutions and does not seek to interfere in the policy of governments.”

Cardinal Martino also explained how the text of the papal message calls for a coherent approach to “the universal destination of the goods of creation” and underlines “the need for renewed solidarity” between generations and between developed and developing countries.

The cardinal also stressed that that approach must “avoid partial viewpoints that tend to exaggerate certain responsibilities more than others.” The cardinal noted the Pope calls “for a balanced use of energy resources.”

Cardinal Martino said that Benedict concludes his message with an “expression of hope in the intelligence and dignity of man,” tracing “a path of profound harmony, both interior and exterior, between the Creator, humankind and creation.”

In closing, the cardinal noted the Pope’s deliberate decision to dedicate his message this year to the theme of ecology, as it coincides with the 30th anniversary of the proclamation of St. Francis of Assisi, author of the Laudes Creaturarum, as patron saint of the environment.

“Love for creation, if projected onto a spiritual horizon, can lead mankind to brotherhood with his fellows and to union with God,” he said.

Origins of Santa

You have probably seen the irritating adverts associating Coca-Cola with Santa Claus. However, History Today reports that a rival drinks company, White Rock, began using images of the jolly red and white chap in 1915, 20 years earlier than Coca Cola. More images here.

In other Santa news, claims have been made that St Nicholas of Myra, the Turkish Bishop considered to be the inspiration for Father Christmas, may be buried in, of all places, Ireland. Apparently crusaders removed the Saints body for its protection, briefly buried it in Italy, and then transferred it to the Cistercian Monastery in Jerpoint, County Kilkenny. So if you want to see Santa, don't fly off to Lapland - cross the Irish Sea instead!

Poor, But Going To Pasadena

Well, I am officially in debt again, but I got two BCS National Championship tickets this morning at face value from ticketmaster. Me an my cousin will be attending. Roll Tide!!!!

Alison Weir on Anne Boleyn

Alison Weir - our visitor last year - has written a new book on the last days of Anne Boleyn investigating the reasons for and circumstances of her fall. Very kindly, an old Nonsuch girl who left last year gave us a copy of the book which is now in the library. Here is a review from the Independent and here is a podcast of a discussion with Alison Weir at the British Library. Enjoy!

Review of the American political year

A helpful reminder of American political events this year here from CNN.

The Best Column I Have Ever Read

Peter Gammons's farewell column for ESPN is quite possibly the best column I have ever read. Please treat yourself.

Ingram On Fox, Awesome!!!

Alabama's Ingram Wins Heisman

Australian History

Regular readers of the blog may have noticed the world map at the bottom of the page. We have had visitors from across Europe, Asia and America but so far none from Australia. If you have friends or relatives from Australia please encourage them to take a look! As an incentive, here is an interesting site that takes a comprehensive look at Australian history, from the arrival of the first aborigines through to the election of Kevin Rudd as Prime Minister. Australia and the UK share many common values as a legacy of an imperial past, but Australia's landscape, climate, immigration and location have contributed to its unique cultural identity. Important references within its heritage would include of course the arrival of Captain Cook and the first fleet (and its subsequent impact on the native Australian population), the settlement and federation of the country, the impact of war (particularly the involvement of the ANZACs in Gallipoli in World War 1, but also Ausralia's involvement in the Korean and Vietnam Wars) and perhaps more recently the success of the Sydney Olympics.

If you think there are other important moments in Australian history or politics that should be noted, please let us know.

PS: TheNational Library of Australia has a useful set of links here to other interesting websistes.

New First Minister in Wales

Rhodri Morgan has stepped down as First Minister in Wales and leader of the Labour Party after nearly ten years in the post. His replacement is the comparatively young Assembly Member (AM) Carwyn Jones, previously a barrister from Cardiff before he became an AM in 1999. See here for more information about him and here for the BBC story.

Gammons To MLB Network

I know all I have done lately is talk about sports (Alabama is in the NC game of course. so it kind of applies), but this maybe going outside the realm of anything relevant: Peter Gammons is leaving ESPN for the MLB network:

For ESPN, even with its platoon of baseball reporters, Gammons had the demanding role of being the instant authority — across ESPN's various platforms — on just about any breaking news.

Awesome coup for MLBN. Gammons is THE authority on baseball for ESPN and he will be sorely missed on baseball tonight.

The Art of Happiness in a Trouble World.

I just finished reading the follow-up book to the #1 bestseller, "The Art of Happiness: A Handbook for Living" by His Holiness the Dalai Lama and Howard C. Cutler, MD. The follow-up is titled, "The Art of Happiness in a Trouble World. I found things that I liked in this book, however, I wouldn't be honest if I said it was an excellent book. I don't like to be critical in life but I won't say I liked something if I didn't. I must say though that this wasn't the Dalai Lama's fault in the least but rather the author who came across as almost pestering His Holiness when he didn't like the answer the Tibetan monk gave.

For example, the author Mr. Cutler spent the first part of the book (five full chapters) on one subject -- the importance of diversity. Now, this is a very important and noble subject to be sure. That said, the author could have covered the subject in breadth within two chapters but spending 109 pages talking about all the different ways one can say, "Diversity is important" gets frustrating and a bit annoying. Of course, I'm not the most patient person in the world but after 109 pages I was somewhat exasperated.

At one point Cutler even writes that the Dalai Lama appeared exasperated with the line of questioning as to why the author couldn't understand that it's not "Me or We" but "Me and We" when relating to others and yet taking care of one's own needs. The Dalai Lama said:

"So, we are not saying to forget about oneself, one's own concerns. That is not realistic. We are saying that you can think about both one's own welfare and the welfare of others at the same time."

Sounds simple enough but not for the annoyingly minutia dwelling author. He apparently thought that wasn't a good enough answer. So he writes, "Nonetheless I persisted with my original question..." which is understandable at first but this was an obnoxious trait of pushing the Dalai Lama persisted through the book. Even someone with unlimited patience like Dalai Lama can't take that much philosophical rambling. So the author continues, "We continued along the same lines for several more moments, as I pressed him for a way to deal with the "opposing" sensibilities of a Me or a We orientation. The Dalai Lama absently rubbed his palm over the crown of his shaved head as I spoke, a gesture of frustration that was also reflected in his rapidly shifting facial expression. As his expression on a priceless mixture of three parts bewilderment, one part amusement, and a dash of disgust, he shook his head and laughed. "I'm just not clear as to where the contradiction lies! From my perspective there is no inherent opposition here."

I realize that I should have more patience for absolutist, black and white thinking such as the one shown by the author in these interviews but such desire for clear-cut, definitive solutions to broad human problems doesn't make for very easy book reading. After awhile you lose focus as the reader and your mind becomes a bit blurry, numb and confused as to what the original point of the author was. Finally, on page 114 I found something useful and insightful brought about by the interviews as the author asked the DL about September 11th and how could human nature be inherintly good in the face of such horrific acts. The Tibetan monk responded wisely:

"Perhaps one thing is that I look at such events from a wider perspective. When such things happen we often tend to look for one person or a group of people to blame. But I think it is wrong just to look at one individual or group of individuals and isolate them as the sole cause. If you adopt a wider view, you'll see that there can be many causes of violence. And there can be many factors contributing to such events. So many factors. In this case, for example, I think religious belief is also involved. So if you reflect on this event more deeply," he explained, "you realize that many factors contributed to this tragedy. To me, this reinforced one crucial fact: It showed to me that modern technology combined with human intelligence and guided by negative emotions -- this is how such unthinkable disasters happen." This made total sense to me and seemed clear but once again the author responded with confusion saying, "Can you elaborate on what you mean by that?" I understand he wants a clear cut answer that fits neatly into his psychiatric, scientific background. That said, by this point it was starting to give me the impression that he was dragging this out, in part to squeeze more juice out of the "Art of Happiness" turnip for another book.

The next 50 pages was more drilling down and getting lost in the minutia of a subject. This time the subject was on the sources of violence, which while important was done at a depth that just frustrated me. Once again the author dissected the subject down so finely that there wasn't much left to take away. The next chapter, chapter 9 about dealing with fear was really good but by page 181 I was exhausted mentally. Unfortunately this was the point at, which I stopped reading because I just couldn't read anymore of the author's pushing the Dalai Lama to say things the author wanted to hear. However, I'll end my long review with quoting something that I did really like from the author in speaking about violence and having hope for reducing it in the future.

"Aren't we essentially compelled to conclude that human nature is fundamentally aggressive? Fortunately the answer to that is, No! According to researchers, during the age of hunter-gatherer socieites, 30 percent of the male population died by violent means, at the hands of others. What was the percentage during the bloody twentieth century, even with the war, the genocides, the constant warfare? Less than 1 percent! And as the new century and millennium has dawned, this rate has continued to fall dramatically."

I wish I had more good to say about this book because as I said, I don't like being critical but I also don't want to be misleading as I think some reviewers tend to be. I often read snippets of reviews on all these book jackets that just gush over them. However, I can't tell you how many times I've been disappointed to find out for myself that what they were saying didn't square with my reading. So while there are some nuggets of insight within this book the majority of it is pretty annoying and again, that's not the fault of the Dalai Lama.