The theft of the neighbor's lawnmower

The preacher last night at the Union Gospel Mission made a powerful-seeming point which began when he asked the congregation, "If I steal my neighbor's lawnmower, will I have sinned?"

The question hung out there, like a dark cloud over the congregants, for heavy moments before men in the audience yelled out a few "yeah"s and "yes"es and "sure"s.

But with flaying fury, the preacher informed us that No, he would not have have sinned, for it's not the theft of the lawnmower that creates the sin, it is the nature of the sinner. It is desire to steal the lawnmower where the sin is posited.

It is only through spirit and Jesus and God's grace that the lawnmower remains sitting there quietly on his neighbor's overgrown, weedy front lawn, he told us.

This lawnmower example/parable/whatever-it-was had me looking askance at the fellow waving his arms around behind the cross-shaped lecturn. Only by being in God's supple arms was he deterred from kiping* Mr. Jones's** Toro***!?

Now, this preacher is already one I respect less than most. He evokes the Christian Trap, as I call it, more than any of the few who do so. The Christian Trap works like this: The congregants are told something on the order of, "All who doubt the Word are chained by their nose rings to Satan. Thus, you must never doubt for a moment the sweet mutterings that a God-sealed soul like I tell you. You must wholly repudiate the Satanic secular world which is evil and cunning and intent on nothing other than to drag you down into the fiery lake." [And I kid you not, some preachers, like the one at issue in this post, are fully this hysterical.]

Of course, most of the fellows in the mission congregation, while Christian, have their other foot in the secular world, and are not all that easily swayed by a mission preacher's hystrionics. Still, as accustomed as I get with some of the terrible-preachers' bloviations, I always worry that some of my friends in the audience bite the hook in the preacher's bait.

But what was most interesting to me about the preacher's Parable of the Lawnmower was that thing that we non-Christians find to be the most freeky about some Christian of the immature stripe. That is, they believe about themselves that, failing Jesus holding them back, they'd run rampant breaking the Ten Commandments in a spree of mayhem.

This preacher, captivated by tribalist hate thinking, has demonized the secular world and all of us in it. Very likely there's a lot of text in the Bible that supports this way of thinking, just as there is much in the Bible that repudiates it. Contrary to what many Christians, like this preacher, think, the Bible is chockablock with contradictions and verse that can be interpretted in different ways, which sadly allows haters that come to the religion to cherry-pick from it what they choose to believe that supports hate mongering. This is the fundamentalist problem that most religions have.

I submit that 99.999 percent, plus, of secular folk are not on the prowl to steal lawnmowers. And that the preacher last night, should he disavow Christianity [which is not something I'm advocating; I'm just supposing], would not go out on a lawnmower-stealing spree, either.

"Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy strength, and with all thy mind, and thy neighbor [including thy perceived enemies] as thyself." [I cherry-picked the preceeding sentence from the Bible, here, here, here, here, here & here.]
-------
* kipe: means "to steal" [It's a slang word that I like that dictionaries tell me is fading away.]

** I figure one's fictive neighbors should always be the Joneses, based on the old saw about "keeping up with the Joneses."

*** A good make of lawnmower that neighbors you want to keep up with are likely to have.

My situation, as compared to the Wanderer's

After having put up the Tricycle piece today about a Chinese Zen man of high rank experiencing homelessness, with equanimity, Ed of the blog Bad Buddha asked how that man’s experience resonates with my own.

To my credit, I have to say that I am doing a great deal better in Homeless World Sacramento than I would ever have supposed. A large part of this is that “the guys” – that is, other homeless people, most of whom are men – are pretty terrific.

My experience differs from the author of the Trike piece in a lot of ways, some of which may be significant. I rarely have to sleep on the streets, and I’ve never had to dumpster dive for sustenance.

I’ve found shelter at the Union Gospel Mission and I’ve been mostly lucky at being able to renew my privilege of getting a seven-day “reservation” to use one of their bunk beds to sleep on. There is food available for me at the mission and at Loaves & Fishes that will guarantee that I will eat good food. Also, I’ve gotten small sums of money from my mother’s death benefit and from general assistance, and food stamps, to assure that there’s a little extra.

When I have had to “stay out” because I could not get a bed at the mission shelter, I usually have just stayed up all night. Sometimes, I’ve found a place to sleep where I haven’t been bothered.

Unlike New York, where the Wanderer was homeless, there aren’t many businesses in Sacramento that are open late hours. The train station is sometimes open as late as midnight; I have stayed there to stay warm. But, both the train station and the bus station sometimes are careful to check people in their lobby and toss out anyone who doesn’t have a ticket. I’ve been tossed out of both places.

There is a Denny’s near Old Sacramento that is open all night. If I have money when I’m out, I’ll go there for a little while.

Another option I have is to stay in the lobby of a hospital Emergency Room. I haven’t done this yet, but I’m told that the Davis Medical Center is a place a well-kempt homeless person can stay and sleep, pretending a friend or relative is being tended to by the hospital staff.

There are a lot of people who have treated me badly because they can tell I’m homeless. Sometimes, I feel bad about that and sort of hide away all day.

As I say, I have a lot of people out here whom I consider to be friends. Some of them have some overwhelming drinking or substance-abuse problems, though when I see them they’ve been sober and even keeled. In just the last week, two good friends, separately, got released from six-month and 30-day stays in jail for being drunk in violation of their parole. I don’t think that either guy has any intention to cease drinking.

Also, my friend Steve and his family have been a big help to me.

While pretty much everybody knows I am Buddhist, other guys I know are pretty intent on making a Christian out of me. Because I sing the hymns and have learned a lot about the Bible, many think I must be wavering in my dedication to Buddhism, but I am not, at all.

The author of the Tricycle piece writes a lot about equanimity. I cannot say that I am equanimitous. My mood varies, but, I think, I am pretty much universally thought to be a nice, smart, big-hearted guy who will do anything for anybody.

The exception to all this is that I’m not happy about a lot of ways that the mission and Loaves & Fishes are run. [See my piece Phobos and Thanatos.] There’s a fellow on-staff at the mission who seems to have no other job than dispense misery and threaten to take guys’ bunks away from them. I cannot understand why the fellow does that or why the mission does not rebuke him. Loaves & Fishes is a dirty and inefficient place, unworthy of the population that it serves. Still, both the mission and L&F attract many Christ-like or bodhisattva-like people who help run the two organizations.

I do try to be even-keeled, and some days I’m successful at that. Sometimes, though, I will have a difficult time in the middle of the night, worrying about how I might ever exit my homeless circumstance and the nine-months-running felony thing – my own personal Bleak House – that refuses to either wrap up or go away. Also, at times, my mind gets caught up thinking about what a supremely dastardly person my sister is. When that happens, I try to distract myself with other, happy thoughts.

As I say, I’m, mostly, not unhappy. Plus, if I ever get back to a life that is somewhat like normalcy, I know I will greatly appreciate a lot of things about it that I didn’t in the past when my life was normal. I will appreciate being more in control of the period when I sleep. I will appreciate being able to decide what it is I will eat. I will appreciate not having to worry about where a bathroom is that I can use, or that I might get sick and suffer mightily.

My experience of homelessness has also "awakened" me toward having an enormous amount of sympathy for poor and homeless people and their incredibly frustrating struggles and to the knowledge that "justice" in America is in terrible shape. Had I not been here in Homeless World Sacramento, I'd never have gained this awareness.

"Groundhog Day" named One of the Ten Best Movies EVER

There are two types of people in this world: those that love Groundhog Day, and those that can't appreciate it. Our job is to exterminate the latter group. -- Adum Miller, webmaster GHD Home Page

The Great Stanley Fish, a frequent contributor to the N. Y. Times, has named "Groundhog Day" as one of his ten favorite movies of all time in an article, "The 10 Best American Movies," published a couple days ago in the Times online. "Groundhog Day," released on the Groundhog holiday, 2/2/1993, is the most-recent of the ten films Fish named.

"Groundhog Day" is the favorite of a great many Buddhists because of the storyline of the movie where the protagonist overcomes his egomaniacal suffering as a result of assimilating to a 24-hour time loop he finds himself trapped in. Other religious faiths also claim the movie as sending a message of their creed about how a person can become better or more spiritual.

Bill Murray plays Phil Connors, the overbearing protagonist, a TV weatherman sent to cover festivities of February 2, in celebration of Groundhog Day, in Punxsutawney, Pennsylvania. Andie MacDowell plays Rita, his producer and romantic interest. And the great character actor Stephen Tobolowsky plays Ned Ryerson, an aggressive life-insurance salesman who once dated Phil's sister.

I fell in love with the movie the first time I saw it and subsequently wrote about it. First, in about 1995 for now-defunct edarma magazine, calling Groundhog Day the greatest Buddhist movie. Then I wrote something for now-sleeping Zen Unbound , "Groundhog Day and the Cosmic Sense," matching Phil's development to levels of cosmic-conscious achievement. Lastly, I wrote a piece called "The Ned Ryerson Conundrum" which was read by Richard Henzel, who voiced a radio DJ in the movie, at the Groundhog Day Breakfast in Woodstock, Il. -- where the movie was filmed -- in celebration of the fifth aniversary of the film's release [i.e., on 2/2/98]. [Is my pride showing?]

My writing has been "disappeared" by my very very very very evil sister who has stolen almost all my belongings, including two laptops and my inheritance of about $100,000, leaving me in abject poverty. Phil Connors isn't the only guy to have problems.

There are, however, two particularly splendid recent pieces about Groundhog Day written by premier buddhobloggers that I am honored to cite: "Groundhog Day, Samsara and Salt" written by the noble Kyle Lovett for Progressive Buddhism; and "Don't Drive Angry..." by the revered, revealing and revolutionary Rev. Danny Fisher for his eponymous blog.

Kyle writes that GD is "[o]ne of [his] favorite movies of all time," even before he was buddhafied. Dano tops that, writing that it's his "favorite 'Buddhist film.'" YOU GO, guys!

Here a snip from Kyle's bodacious and deep essay:

Today, some Buddhist's point to this movie as an example of Samsara, and some temples even have screenings every February 2nd. But what is Samsara and what does Groundhog Day have to do with it? Samsara has been translated into a few different types of meanings in the Buddhist tradition, depending greatly on who you hear it from. However, loosely speaking, Samsara is this wheel of life we are on, these ups and down and endless cycles and perhaps we can even say it stands in opposition of Nirvana.

And here some fine words from the remarkable remarking reverand's piece:

The Buddha once said, "I teach only suffering and its end." To my thinking, if ever there was a film that taught that same material exactly, it's Groundhog Day. Phil Connors, the sour protagonist portrayed by Bill Murray (in what Time Magazine's Richard Corliss very rightly calls one of the great screen performances of all time), slowly comes to grips with the reality of suffering and discovers a way to relate to it that leads to an unexpected peace.

Wow! Good stuff, eh? Who wouldn't want to spend eternity reading and rereading these guys' essays!?

But wait! What's this!? A blogpost by the revolting reverand revealing he reviles Groundhog Day!!! In his Sept 2008 post, "A list of films about Buddhism," Daniel LEAVES GROUNDHOG DAY OFF THE LIST OF 60 FILMS! And where is Ikiru? Man, Dano. Asleep at the wheel!?

Update #1 [1/9/09] I take back my pretend criticism of Danny Fisher's list of films about Buddhism. Indeed, only movies that are overtly about Buddhism should be on the list. The problem with Groundhog Day (and the Matrix) are that they try to be pluralistically religious. Both GHD & Matrix are "claimed" by Christians, as indeed the screenwriters intended. Both GHD & Matrix have symbolism that is meant to attract various religions. Nonetheless, GHD tracts mostly with mayajana Buddhist belief with its ego-diminishment message.

Update #2 [1/9/09] EeeHa. I found all of my old Groundhog Day writing on the Internet archives [i.e., the Wayback Machine] "The Greatest Buddhism Movie Ever Made!," found in the Zen Unbound [when it was on AOL] archives. The article first appeared in edharma. Then there is "On the Trail of the Groundhog," an early version of "Groundhog Day and the Cosmic Sense." And, finally, "The Ned Ryerson Conundrum." Now that Blogger allows for post-dated entries, I will very likely update all three articles and schedule them for a 2/2/09 publication in this blog.

Skeptics and True Believers

These descriptions of (1) Skeptics and (2) True Believers in Chet Raymo's book "Skeptics and True Believers: The Exhilarating Connection between Science and Religion" sound good to me, but it should be noted that Raymo is, himself, a skeptic -- as am I.

• Skeptics are children of the Scientific Revolution and the Enlightenment. They are always a little lost in the vastness of the cosmos, but they trust the ability of the human mind to make sense of the world. They accept the evolving nature of truth, and are willing to live with a measure of uncertainty. Their world is colored in shades of gray. They tend to be socially optimistic, creative and confident of progress. Since they hold their truths tentatively, Skeptics are tolerant of cultural and religious diversity. They are more interested in refining their own views than in proselytizing others. If they are theists, they wrestle with their God in a continuing struggle of faith. They are often plagued by personal doubts and prone to depression.



• True Believers are less confident that humans can sort things out for themselves. They look for help from outside -- from God, spirits or extraterrestrials. Their world is black and white. They seek simple and certain truths, provided by a source that is more reliable than the human mind. True Believers prefer a universe proportioned to the human scale. They are repulsed by diversity, comforted by dogma and respectful of authority. True Believers go out of their way to offer (sometimes forcibly administer) their truths to others, convinced of the righteousness of their cause. They are likely to be "born again," redeemed by faith, apocalyptic. Although generally pessimistic about the state of this world, they are confident that something better lies beyond the grave.