Sit Properly

A couple people have mentioned the last line of my last post: “We’re not just ripe for it, we’re rotting for want of it!”

When I wrote it, I knew that I didn’t dream it up on my own, but I couldn’t remember where I had heard it. So with a bit of The Google, I found it.

It’s a historical quote from the era of the American Revolution. However, where I heard it was from the musical 1776 (which is about the times building up to the Revolution).

In the movie, Joseph Hughes says “We’re not yet ripe for Independence.” Stephen Hopkins replies, “Not ripe? Hell, we’re rotting for want of it!”

While the movie gave the line to Hopkins, historically, the quote was said by John Witherspoon from New Jersey.

So now you know, the colonists of early America were rotting for want of revolution. Just as we devotees are rotting for want of real spiritual guidance.

I wonder, how long will we rot before a revolution of our own.

Sometimes people of faith, devotees in particular, try to make themselves and their philosophies seem more advanced by making people who aren’t like them seem worse. This is hardly fine for discussions with like-minded believers, let alone if you’re trying to convince or convert the same people you’re insulting.

An example of this would be a recent “Thought of the Day” post by an initiating ISKCON guru about Obama (a supposed supporter of pro-choice) winning the election:

It’s actually unthinkable that we are living in the midst of a baby-killing civilization. But yet it is a fact. This is not human civilization. This is lower than animal civilization. Which animals do we see that kill their own offspring? When the foolish people of a nation choose leaders who support the killing of innocent children within the womb, it is a bleak day indeed for that nation.

[My emphasis.]

Which animals do we see that kill their own offspring? Quite a lot, really. Many animals engage in what zoologists refer to as “infanticide.” If you have ever raised hamsters, puppies or kittens or been anywhere near a farm, you would know that this practice (more properly, “instinct”) is very common. It’s also on Wikipedia, if anyone is interested.

To try to use it in an analogy to prove that the “karmis” are worse than animals because they elected Obama makes the whole argument sound even sillier than it already is (and I’m not even close to being an Obama supporter). In fact, it calls into question the sanity of the entire philosophy.

If someone hears something obviously wrong in what we’re saying, it makes them wonder if the rest of our philosophy is wrong. I’m not talking about opinions and things people can disagree with (evolution, abortion, etc). I’m talking about facts. In this example, it is a commonly known fact that many, many animals kill their young. To say animals don’t kill their young is sloppy, misinformed and most importantly makes the reader wonder if everything else said (the stuff that’s actually about the philosophy) is wrong.

I’ve taken issue with this particular devotee’s writings before. Specifically a bizarre letter to the “great hero” George W. Bush… (My “favorite” part is when he says that Bush was “re-elected with such an overwhelming majority of the voters’ support.” What?! How about a little fact-checking here.

When seen together, the political leanings are obvious. But that’s not what I’m looking for in a spiritual leader. If I wanted political leanings, I’d listen to NPR or watch Fox News.

Please, to our gurus and supposedly fit leaders, give us some real spirituality! We’re not just ripe for it, we’re rotting for want of it!

My friend Ryan related this story to me the other day. I find that it sadly rings true to so much of what I’m seeing in the renounced orders as of late.

Once, a young monk was walking with an elder monk on their way back to their temple after several days of travel. On the way, they came to a creek bed, the banks of which had softened to a wet, muddy mess. At the edge of the creek stood an attractive young woman dressed in traditional gowns, who was obviously wanting to cross, but had no idea how to contend with the mud. If she attempted to traverse it, her legs would surely sink shin-deep into the muck.

As they approached the young lady, the younger monk averted his eyes and looked down, for theirs was a stern discipline, and monks were not allowed to even gaze upon a woman, let alone speak to or interact with one, particularly one as fetching and young as her. To his horror, however, the older monk walked straight toward the woman and asked her if she needed to cross. The woman shyly said “yes,” and without another word, he hoisted her onto his back and carried the woman across the creek.

The younger monk followed them across the creek, stunned. Once upon the other side, the woman profusely thanked her new friend, shook his hand, and resumed her journey, disappearing into the trees.

The young monk was aghast, but respectful of his elder, he held his tongue. For three hours they walked side by side, all the while the student confused as to how his companion could so flagrantly violate one of the cardinal rules of their temple. The older monk had, after all, not only engaged the woman, he had spoken to her, and then not only did he touch her, he carried her on his back! How could such a thing be justified?!

For another hour they walked in total silence, and finally came the point when the young man could stand it no longer. He stepped forward two paces and then turned to face his companion in anger. “How could you do that?!” he shouted.

“Do what?” asked the older monk, looking at him.

“It is a sin to touch a woman!” shouted the younger monk, “a violation to even gaze upon her, and yet you spoke with her.” He sputtered in his anger. “You carried her across the creek! YOU CARRIED HER!!”

The elder monk smiled the faintest of smiles and spoke to his young friend, “I left that woman at the river bank… why are you still carrying her?”