223: Revolution in the Ten Directions

[Jundo]

tsuku.jpg
Buddhas Left Right Center, in the Ten Directions

We need a revolutionary movement of left wing, right wing and center together. Yes, it sounds impossible, even counter-intuitive.

How can so many different people of different values change the world together?

In fact, Buddhism may offers some lessons how.

In a monastery, a Sangha, people of all political persuasions, backgrounds and personal beliefs come together and live together, practicing in peace and cooperation, working as a single body. They are often very different people, and there can be frictions, but differences are put aside. The Buddha and the old Zen Masters taught rich and poor and all classes, kings and peasants and in between, all very different yet all welcome to practice and learn.

In fact, the whole universe contains left, right, center and all directions, and is boundless too, holding all ...

... what Buddhists of old called "Dharmas (things) in the Ten Directions."

So, I would like to see a political movement like that. Though Buddhist inspired, it need not even be only Buddhist, for people of all religions, all creeds and no religion or particular creed would be welcome. You are even welcome if you believe that your God is the right one and other Gods are not, that your social views are the right ones and others are dead wrong, that your opinion on sex or marriage is right and other ways sinful. People of all colors, all nationalities, LGBTQ and folks who personally believe there are only two sexes, those who believe in "right to choose" and others who support "right to life," Israelis and Palestinians, Ukrainians and Russians ... room for all even if convinced that those who disagree are misguided.

All will fit under a single roof. It sounds nearly impossible! HOW COULD THAT BE!?

Actually, all will fit under a single roof ...
.
.

-IF- we agree on a few basic principles.

What are those?

223 is inspired by the Buddha's Teachings in Dhammapada Verse 223, emphasizing peace, goodness, charity and the avoiding of dishonesty. Other religions and philosophies profess much the same.

First, there has be non-violence and non-aggression in words and actions even when we agree to disagree. Civil discussion and calm, respectful debate must return to our society in discussing things. In fact, the only folks banished from 223 would be those who engage in angry violence, hateful disparagement, and disrespect of others. Monks speak calmly among themselves, and abide in harmony, even where viewpoints disagree. We know how to see beyond opinions, free of "me vs. you."

Second (this is hard for many today), we should respect true expertise, education, science, evidence and calm reasoning when conducting our discussions and debates. We must value truth, not merely victory in argument, innuendo and manufactured memes. That does not mean that all need agree, but we must value reputable and well-grounded information from respected sources without an agenda beyond truth. In the monastery, those with many seasons of practice, with a reputation for being balanced, compassionate and wise, are valued over those who are new, dishonest or shallow.

Third (this is also hard for many today), we must each be allowed to practice our own beliefs, lifestyles and values in our own safe place, even if you do not agree with someone else's choices. If consenting adults there by choice, if nobody is being hurt, everyone should be allowed to love and live with others as they choose. That does not mean that I must approve of your lifestyle, whether alternative, traditional, dull or downright antiquated, but neither should I make it my business. If I do not like how you love, I should simply look away. If there is some place where your values might be thrust upon me, we must work out ways to minimize such things, with a spirit of patience and compromise. (I heard a joke recently: "How do people of 5 different genders share two bathrooms?" ANSWER: "Take turns. Like people of two genders and one bathroom.") In fact, this is not like the monastery much, where all were celibate. But it is like our sitting places, with mine here and yours there, each person with their own place.

Fourth, even if we disagree on the methods to achieve so, we must all work together so that the poorest and most vulnerable in society and the world do not fall too low, and that all people have a basic right to food, water, equal educational opportunities, access to good medicine, decent work in a healthy environment, their own home (and homeland) where they can reside by choice in a safe place free from violence. All people of this world should be treated with respect and dignity by all others who share this world. We can disagree on how to attain these goals, with different economic or political policies. However, we should agree to work for such a society. In the temple, all have a right to a safe place to sit, sleep and practice, healthy food, clothing, medicine, opportunities and education, ideally to be bestowed fairly. Like monks cleaning a temple, we should also vow to protect this planet, keep it clean.

Fifth, because we will disagree on the details, we must build political systems that we can trust. Money should be removed from politics, and replaced instead by decency, with leaders who are not out for themselves, but instead, have the people's best interests truly in heart. This will be the place of true revolution, overturning the present state of affairs. My simple method (all too simple, just a dream) would be to appoint a "Senate of Elders," an "upper house" of scientists, economists, historians, philosophers and other scholars, church leaders from dozens of varied denominations as well as skeptics with no religion, award winners in their respective fields in the arts, literature, architecture and social causes. Create an A.I. system to select them fairly, with balance and diversity. Seats would be reserved for voices from across the political spectrum too. Prime minister and cabinet would be drawn from there. There would also be a "lower house" popularly elected by all citizens, one person one vote. However, in this system, policies would be determined exclusively by the wise people of the "Senate of Elders," with the popular, lower house granted only veto power over upper chamber membership and the decisions of the same, enough to stop, delay or bring change. (This notion is, in fact, inspired by the traditional governance structure of Asian monasteries in which elder priests make the decisions, but the entire body of monks will check and protest any abuse by group voice and consensus.)

While far from a perfect system, it would be better than what exists in any country today.

If we can play together by a few rules like that, we can all share our family, friendships, work place, town, country and whole planet with the folks with whom we disagree, even strongly.

Master Dogen spoke of a universe holding all directions and beyond all directions, left right and everyway. In Shobogenzo-Tsuki he wrote of the moon's Wholeness which shines and holds all things, all differences and all directions ...
,

The Ancient Buddha said, '
One mind is all dharmas and all dharmas are one-mind.
Therefore, the mind is all things. All things are one mind.
Because the mind is the moon, the moon is the moon ...
the entire universe is the entire moon. The whole body is the whole moon. ...
The ten-direction world is the up and down,
the left and right of the moon.
The present activities in our daily lives are
the bright hundred grasses [all variety and differences] within the moon ...


image.png

Gassho, J
stlah

[Choujou]

Wonderful Roshi, and I wholeheartedly agree! Thank you! You say you’re a dreamer, but you’re not the only one! I would love for the world to be this way… Just imagine…

Gassho,
Choujou

sat/lah today

[Shinshi]

I just love, love, love this sentiment.

I think the Second will be tricky as there are many versions of the truth out in the wild today. And so many "experts" that disagree vehemently. I was just reading today about doctors in Texas trying to get children inoculated against measles. The parents believe the alternate "truth" given by JFK Jr. and others and so won't agree to the inoculations for their kids. That one might be tricky.

But, mostly I like this very much.

One last point, and maybe you already know this. But 223 is the caliber of the most common rounds fired by the AR-15. If you google 223 that is what is likely to come up. So that name might be a trigger for folks on both sides of the gun control issue.

Gassho,

Shinshi

[Jundo]

I just love, love, love this sentiment.

I think the Second will be tricky as there are many versions of the truth out in the wild today. And so many "experts" that disagree vehemently. I was just reading today about doctors in Texas trying to get children inoculated against measles. The parents believe the alternate "truth" given by JFK Jr. and others and so won't agree to the inoculations for their kids. That one might be tricky.

But, mostly I like this very much.

One last point, and maybe you already know this. But 223 is the caliber of the most common rounds fired by the AR-15. If you google 223 that is what is likely to come up. So that name might be a trigger for folks on both sides of the gun control issue.

Gassho,

Shinshi

I believe that a good test for an "expert" is the person who is in a respected large institution that has hard standards, and is widely respected by peers in his/her and closely related peers. So, a doctor from the National Cancer Institute or Johns Hopkins University is to be listened to about cancer more than an osteopath in Backwater, Texas.

Of course, there are exceptions: For example, Galileo and Darwin went against the widely accepted institutions and notions of their time. However, in their case, with time, a good and true idea just survives and wins in the end. Thus, for example, the idea that "grapes cure cancer" can be asserted by someone, and fill Facebook quoting the doctor in Backwater, but is likely to peter out in the end for lack of accuracy. A cancer drug that survives testing, the FDA and is widely accepted by cancer doctors for their patients will be much more successful.

Someone wrote elsewhere asking how these ideas can be implemented in this complex world. I wrote them this, among other suggestions.

A few ways. First, one person can do next to nothing on a wide scale. However, one person joined with ten people, then 10 thousand and 10 million can start to have an impact and push for change. Even if such a movement does not fully change society and solve all problems, it can have great impact, bring improvements and get ideas into the marketplace. The Civil Rights/Women's Rights movements are an example.

Second, a large number of people agreeing to act such ways among themselves will create a healthy bubble within society of people living that way. In other words, arguing and disinformation will be going on outside the bubble, but members within the bubble will act toward each other differently. Examples might include anything from the Mormons/Orthodox Jews (upholding their own values despite pressures from outside society) to the European Union (maintaining largely republican government in a world where the vast majority of countries are authoritarian.) People in the bubble would discuss in a civil manner, practice peace and tolerance, maintain reliable news sources, shield themselves from outside propaganda, etc.

Gassho, J
stlah

[Shinshi]

Hi Jundo,

I think maybe you misunderstood me. The doctor in backwater Texas was trying to get the children that come to see him vaccinated. He believes the same as the doctor from the John Hopkins. But the child's parents won't get their children vaccinated because they trust their experts: JFK Jr. and the like that say that vaccinations are wrong - and dangerous to the child. And so they do not get the vaccinations for their children that will save lives. The parents don't think the the National Cancer Institute or John Hopkins is to be trusted.

I think it might be challenge to get all the parties agree on who the trusted experts will be. But I might well be wrong.

Gassho,

Shinshi

[Koushi]

Hi Jundo,

I think maybe you misunderstood me. The doctor in backwater Texas was trying to get the children that come to see him vaccinated. He believes the same as the doctor from the John Hopkins. But the child's parents won't get their children vaccinated because they trust their experts: JFK Jr. and the like that say that vaccinations are wrong - and dangerous to the child. And so they do not get the vaccinations for their children that will save lives. The parents don't think the the National Cancer Institute or John Hopkins is to be trusted.

I think it might be challenge to get all the parties agree on who the trusted experts will be. But I might well be wrong.

Gassho,

Shinshi

This reminds me of me and my very conservative, (now) senior, mother and stepfather during the beginning of covid.

I'm very much science oriented, always have been. The only experts they ever cared about wore blue-collars and considered scientists woo-woo. Any attempt for me to persuade them into believing the scientists enough to get the covid vaccine would have failed. They had their opinions and messengers they believed and they were firmly against it.

Instead, I took them along for and shared my own experience. From going to the drive-thru center ran by the army, to my first minor side-effects, to going back to the same center, and my second night/experience with minor side-effects.

(Keep in mind that I have pretty extreme white-coat syndrome and, despite my many tattoos, avoid all other needles at all cost.)

I figured, if I couldn't debate, persuade, or force them to get it—I could at the very least show them that I was fine and let them know it wasn't just for me, it was for them, too.

It was hard to ignore the many deaths at that time, pre-vaccine, but I do believe that compassion "won" here. They got theirs a couple of weeks after I was fully vaccinated—and my siblings saw and followed suit.

Can we come together in today's ultra-partisan, individualistic, "I'll get mine at the expense of you" society? I'm not sure. Arguments and persuasion (and propaganda) won't work. Neither will "I'm right! We're right! Come to our side!".

So... all I can figure is, we open-mindedly and open-heartedly experience, share, and be together. That doctor who is treating the children now, will treat the children if they get measles too. Maybe all we can do is "treat" every step among each other as medicine via loving experience.

Or maybe I've ran out of all other ideas and being kind in the face of tornadoes is all I have left.

Gassho,
Koushi
ST

(sorry for running long)

[Fâtih]

Dear Jundo;

You're opening new dharma doors.

Thank you for your limitless effort.

I learnt so much from your article.

Thank you again.

Gassho, Fâtih, Sat