“Power is in tearing human minds to pieces and putting them together again in the new shapes of your own choosing.”—George Orwell, 1984
The “No King Movement” rehashes issues of 250 years ago, 100 years ago and today: Whether we govern by decree or through law. Both can be bitter or sweet. While the former is more likely to have a bitter twinge, the latter can too. The difference is the latter offers hope of some restitution to the forced bitterness of no understanding of why it is necessary or for how long. Today we are debating the need for transparency and coming face-to-face with the lie that honesty is not the best (political) policy.
The term “Horoniga” (bitter-sweet) is a perfect metaphor for the “Truth” element of Right Speech. In Buddhism, the truth can sometimes be “bitter” or “disagreeable,” but if it is beneficial and spoken at the right time, the benefit outweighs the discomfort. Mary Poppins anyone? This suggests the Buddhist concept of “kala— sometimes the truth is bitter to say and bitter to hear but if it is beneficial it must be said.” The Emperor’s new clothes, anyone?
Right Vision/View in one sense depends on having a framework that coincides with the belief that as a general practice, helping is better than hurting. In young children perceiving the I (me) separating from others begins the parents’ work of explaining why and to what extent actions can be hurtful to others. Some years ago my sister’s daughter asked her daughter to give a toy back to my daughter. The answer was: “I don’t believe I can.” To which my niece replied: “I think you will.” This simple conversation set the stage for the next level or Right Effort which is to help both daughter understand the convention of give-recieve-share and the nuances of when, where, how there can be somethings you can do for others.
Today the British monarchy is going through a revolution (make that a review) of institutional relevance, making adjustments and trying them out with the population. Today the Trump operation is in its tenth year of doing the same. The former with an eye toward flexibility and the former with a demand for absolutism. This approach is shaming: You miss, are a lying pig as a response to a question, therefore being damning the question and the women while sending girls (and me for that matter) to find a grown-up that can explain what the man means by his words. The president was acting out rather than speaking-up.
I use the example above to indicate that whether conscious or unconscious, “acting-out,” can cause others to suffer. A mother overhearing this trump-like (trump with a small ‘t’ meaning to lord-over) exchange of her child with another child would be faced with the truth or consequences of speaking/behaving such away to others!
Finally, the idea of a harmonious community (Buddha), or beloved community (MLK) is about addressing the suffering of self before helping others. The United States Constitution came out of the war to gain the right to be written. There was a hashing out of the words, a social campaign to be launched when independence was gained. The constitution as law was entrusted to us by our ancestors.
It should not be wasted on us that we are facing the question of rights, whether those that began after the independence was won or the self-decgrees of a person who demands the right to do wherever he wishes.
It’s not what would Buddha do, but what are we doing… your thoughts?
Sangaku