Archive for January, 2008

A LESSING IN WAR: WHAT HAPPENS WHEN VIOLENCE HITS, WHEN WAR IS DECLARED

Wednesday, January 30th, 2008

If you get a chance, see the previous blog about Shi Tao, a Chinese journalist who has been jailed for sending an email to a pro-democracy correspondent (I believe in the States) “in which [Shi Tao] summarized instructions from the Central Propaganda Department about the correct political response journalists ought to take toward the 15th anniversary of the Tiananmen Square massacre.”

Actually, Shi Tao’s courage offered exactly what Henry Kissinger didn’t, way back at the time of the massacre, when as an “independent observer” (running a company at the time called, I believe, “China Ventures”), he said on “the big TV”, paraphrasing, let’s not be too harsh on the Chinese government.

Thank you, Henry. That lie of impartiality was partial inspiration for this song, its second verse specifically.

Beijing Olympics, anyone?

But I wanted to give you a quote here from Doris Lessing that I have had to paraphrase for sometime, because way back I lost the book (Prisons We Choose To Live Inside), based on an Ideas Lecture series she’d given on CBC radion, I believe. The book remains missing, but I recently found the quote, in something I’d written a few years back.

When I read the comment in her book years ago, some part of it really imprinted on me, resonated, woke me up to the difficulty of being human, of negotiating and negotiations, of being peaceful.

Hold up what she says against what you’ve witnessed yourself, in the media, among friends, after 9/11 or any other horrendous event, and you may find it revealing.

We see the dis-ease all over the world, in varying degrees.

Lessing writes (pg 16):

In times of war we revert, as a species, to the past, and are permitted to be brutal and cruel. It is for this reason and many others, that a great many people enjoy war. But this is one of the facts about war that is not often talked about.

I think it is sentimental to discuss the subject of war, or peace, without acknowledging that a great many people enjoy war—not only the idea of it, but the fighting itself.

In my time I have sat through many hours listening to people talking about war, the prevention of war, the awfulness of war, without it ever being mentioned that for large numbers of people the idea of war is exciting, and that when a war is over they may say it was the best time of their lives. This may be true even of people whose experiences in war were terrible, and which ruined their lives.

People who have lived through a war know that as it approaches, an at first secret, unacknowledged elation begins, as if an almost inaudible drum is beating…Then the elation becomes too strong to be ignored or overlooked: then everyone is possessed by it.

These “forces”, whatever they are, exert an extraordinary pressure (I wrote an essay called Genocidosis, asking the same question from a different angle, when I was doing the two documentaries Uganda Rising and Hope In The Time of AIDS).

And institutional forces are similarly compelling on the individual, or the collective—indeed, both our responses and creations are interrealted and from human consciousness, manifested—self-evidently. Noam Chomsky once said:

I often have been asked what would be the first thing I would do as president of the United States.

Well, I would set up a war-crimes tribunal, in advance, for the crimes I was going to commit. I don’t mean that I am a bad person. But the way our institutions are structured, a person in such a position will be under pressures leading to criminal behavior.

I cannot think of anyone who has avoided it. So, I assume that I wouldn’t either.

I ask myself often, in my meditations: how much of what I do is free will? How much of what I do is just spontaneously—almost involuntarily—what this system (me) is compulsively doing, within the system it resides (biological nature and the manifestation of that system, human culture), despite having all the markings of individual, free thought?

It’s a humbling, disarming question.

A yogic saying is: “Habit is our second nature.”

Although not everybody wants either solidarity or greater community—I do—I write this wishing you inspired, expansive thoughts and actions, with discernment and compassion,

Pete

CHINESE JOURNALIST SHI TAO: TEN YEARS FOR AN EMAIL

Wednesday, January 30th, 2008

I just received this from Amnesty International, and can barely even comprehend the madness and sickness of it, in this bizarre thing called the human species. I thought I could at least put it out on the blog.

From his mother:

“[Shi Tao] has only done what a courageous journalist should do. That is why he has got the support and the sympathy from his colleagues all over the world who uphold justice.”
—Shi Tao’s mother, on accepting a press freedom award on his behalf

From Amnesty International:

[Shi Tao, a freelance journalist, writer, and poet] was detained in 2004 on the basis of an email he sent to a pro-democracy contact in the United States, in which he summarized instructions from the Central Propaganda Department about the correct political response journalists ought to take toward the 15th anniversary of the Tiananmen Square massacre.

Shi Tao says the police had no warrant for his arrest or for the search of his home, computer, and notebooks. Three weeks later he was charged with “illegally providing state secrets to foreign entities.”

He was then isolated from family, his lawyer, and other prisoners until 25 January 2005. On 30 April 2005, after a two-hour secret trial, the Changsha Intermediate People’s Court sentenced Shi Tao to 10 years in prison.

Shi Tao remains in prison.

Journalists worldwide are standing behind Shi Tao. Please join them.

Quoting Shi Tao:

“Facing such tremendous adversities, I feel no shame, and I have not lost confidence in my future.”
—Shi Tao

I have no idea what needs to be added, except gratitude, compassion, love, hope, courage, strength, kindness, joy, integrity, humility—and discernment. I felt a chill of fear shoot down me.

The freedom of expression we have in Canada is so incredible, and understanding how it came to be, and how to protect it, and how to expand it (and trying to understand at all the vast polarities, beliefs and compulsions within human beings), is so profound, and also intimidating, because all concepts, zeitgeists and beliefs shift and change for seeming obvious and yet countless mysterious reasons.

That the Olympics—these games of so-called international cooperation—are being held in Beijing, of course, this year, is both paradoxical and discerning. One can only hope by association the level of freedom of speech expands (and Shi Tao, and all the thousands of other political prisoners, are released).

Signing the petition is free. The Amnesty International link is here. It takes about ten seconds. In countless cases, pressure really does help.

May you sleep well tonight, and may the world be improving. Lots of love to you and yours,

Pete

GRATITUDE and THOUGHT FOR FOOD

Tuesday, January 29th, 2008

I just wanted to thank people who comment on the blog. I get really great feedback, insight, theory, and, well, love and kindness, actually, which is a wonderful thing.

Again, with projects, I haven’t had as much time as I’d like to write lately—and when I had a chance last night, for example, I spent it answering comments on the Marc Emery blog post.

TSUNANIMOUSLY YOURS

Ah, yes, if you experience information overload, spinning knowledge, repetitive thoughts, anxiety or depression with the world as you think it, and so on, what I am about to offer may not help at all. Nonetheless, I wrote a little poem (yes, I can’t help it) the other day that offers an idea, an image, a process, that hopefully makes those wild thoughts a little more digestable—or, for that matter, this run-on sentence a little more digestable.

THOUGHT FOR FOOD

If you find your mind is wild
A billion thoughts unreconciled
Into your belly, drop your doubt
Fill your tummy and push it out

Strange, I know, this gut suggestion
But that’s where thoughts will find digestion
For those with crazy thoughts in flight
Tend to hold their tummy tight

Which keeps one’s thoughts up in the head
Drop them to your gut instead
We’ve all heard of “food for thought”
But “thought for food” we’re never taught

So if you find your mind is wild
A billion thoughts unreconciled
Into belly fire, drop your doubt
Love your tummy and let it out*

*This is to be done consciously, and in that way, aware of one’s breathing pattern, too. This is counter to the unconscious process of the worrying that makes one’s stomach, as they say, “sick with worry.” This Thought For Food is a digestion/letting go/offering process, that sends the thoughts into the sacrificial belly fire, to be burnt away. Or, if you’re particular skilled, to be reheated into Venus Fertility Goddesses who understand the Tao of nature (which is different than the Dow Jones).

This process can also be used to warm your feet and provide reading light. I made that up. Money back guarantee, batteries not included.

Lots of love to you,

Pete

WRITING TO REMEMBER: Poetry as the World Carries On

Friday, January 25th, 2008

I was just thinking today—as most days—about how, when I’m writing intensely about the material world (in this case the legendary Muhammad Ali and those who did battle with him, and what it all meant), it’s so important for me to keep a spiritual/expansive/relaxed yet discerning outlook on everything that’s going on within and around me. Smile, in other words, right now.

Why? Because the mind (manas) is so addicted to the world, and the world is so addicting, so compelling, so consuming. And the less I pull back and go inwards, the more I spin wildly with my addiction—to knowledge, to information, to typing frantically like a squirrel on amphetamines (running across a keyboard).

What exactly we are I can not say with any so-called realized knowledge. Still, the emotion that arises from wondering, exploring, or associating with myself, my breathing, and with those great teachers and thinkers who have a wide, even beyond-worldcentric view of existence, remains for me a massive pleasure and gift.

If you know what I mean, you’ll know what I mean (if you know what I mean). If you don’t, there are a whole bunch of earlier blogs that could be more up your alley.

Either way, last night, after days of intense writing and research, and trying to find a beautiful, expansive way of approaching this new work, I went to my favourite philosophy of yoga (and Vedanta) class and, while listening, spontaneously scribbled down a few verses about this temporary, mysterious journey we call existence.

Or as Leibniz put it:

Why is there something instead of nothing?

And why personhood? Why individual beings? Why relationship?

REMEMBERING POETRY

Anyway, seeing as I’ve been unable to blog for awhile, due to time constraints (and I’m such a wordy fella), I thought I’d share them with you.

Ali, ever more Sufi-centric, it seems, as his years go on, might be pleased. May they give you pause to breathe deeply, and remember the inconceivable miracle of existence (you, in other words).

If not, may you just think, “What a deluded freak, ha ha ha. PS Get a job.”

More importantly, may you write a few dreams yourself, whenever you feel it.

* * *

THE WORLD CARRIES ON

The world carries on
Whether I panic
Whether I breathe
or whether I’m manic

Knowing this
calms my nerves
That life is bound
by twists and curves

Knowing no deal
Will e’er delay
The fact that Pete
Will fade away

So how to learn
to Self maintain
While here
So others can, the same?

For all the riches
we collect
at death’s arrival
can’t protect

Or for that matter
when fate does switch
Thrown from palace
to the ditch

The world cares not
what is earned or stolen
She scrapes you clean
and keeps on rollin’

And what remains
when all is taken?
The dress of flesh
from body shaken?

Leaves rich with nothing
Same for poor
Is anything left
to live some more?

Is there some tally
of right and wrong
Or where we’re going
when we’re gone?

What can I say
What do I know?
I know not yet
The second show

And if I have
been here forever
I live its past
but don’t remember

Where goes this life?
I cannot say
But it never ends
At end of day

Given that
I wonder, true
If when end comes
I live on, too

Not the body
Ol’ befuddler
The endless dream
of something subtler

The eye inside
this wondrous being
Seeking love
in all we’re seeing

Behind the rock
the sky, the strife
Is there a being
breathing life?

I do not know
Yet still I ask
Believing that’s
the human task

For when this world
is all in tatters
Relationship
is all that matters

With friend and lover
and mother Earth
Without it
there can be no birth

So what is Earth
and what is mine?
Is there a me
that’s more Divine

Not more Divine
as bad or good
But a Source of all
this personhood

Outside these thoughts
Inside this breath
Between us all
Beyond this death?

I taste You when
I cannot hide
From beauty’s grasp
A slave inside

Oh sacred flame
stay lit in me
And light the dream
of mystery

Lots of love to you,

Pete

Marc Emery, Prince of Pot: Leave The Canadian Alone!

Friday, January 25th, 2008

I don’t know enough about the legalities (and even less about pot), but the Marc Emery extradition seems not only unnecessary—he’s Canadian!—it should be raising alarm bells for liberals, libertarians, small “c” conservatives, churchgoers, atheists, mystics and, well, anybody who is not a pledged and committed Statist.

Here’s an interview with Emery from a few days ago.

An excerpt:

QUESTION: This seems to be a very rare, specific situation, where they have targeted you in a very hard-line manner which is out of step with the Canadian approach to drugs.

EMERY: This is a non-violent crime they are accusing me of committing that has no victim. This is ideologically driven. The idea that they would seek to extradite me on this for a non-violent offense when there’s no one claiming harm, this is unheard of. I’ve run for political office ten times in Canada. It’s very unusual.

It’s clearly the DEA’s insistence on following this up that has driven Canadian authorities to attack me in this unprecedented way.

Working on the Muhammad Ali project, I am reminded of when Ali had his Heavyweight Championship of the World title taken away for his refusal to go to Vietnam—when, as anyone can tell, the two things have next-to-nothing to do with each other.

I don’t know the story very well, but how does a Canadian, living in Canada—a sovereign country—get extradited?

The rest of the Emery interview is here.

I am also reminded of the extraordinary double standards and hypocrisy with heinous crimes (and extraditions) in the War on Terror. Consider accused terrorist and naturalised Venezuelan Luis Posada Carriles, and his extradition situation in, yes, the US.

An excerpt:

Posada entered the U.S. illegally in 2005. Human rights groups and the Cuban and Venezuelan governments urged that he be tried or extradited for his terrorist activities, but for several months the Bush administration denied that Posada was even in the United States.

On May 17, 2005, the Miami Herald shamed the administration into action by publishing a front-page interview with Posada (who sipped his peach drink on his Florida balcony, described his leisure reading and commented cheerfully that at first he “thought the [U.S.] government was looking for me” but eventually realized that U.S. officials had no interest in finding him).

Only then did the administration detain Posada—but on immigration charges, not terrorism-related charges.

Since 2005, the administration seems to have done everything in its power to botch the immigration case against Posada, mishandling it so blatantly that on Wednesday an exasperated federal judge declared herself “left with no choice” but to throw out the indictment.

Although a different judge previously ordered Posada deported, Posada can’t legally be extradited to Venezuela because the court concluded that he might be tortured there.

So for now, Posada’s a free man—even though the administration has sufficient evidence to arrest him for his role in either the 1976 airliner bombing or the 1997 Havana bombings. For that matter, Posada easily could be detained under Section 412 of the Patriot Act, which calls for the mandatory detention of aliens suspected of terrorism.

The administration’s approach to Posada contrasts jarringly with its approach to suspected Al Qaeda terrorists. With the latter, the administration wastes no time on legal niceties. Foreign nationals have been illegally “rendered” to countries where they faced torture, interrogated in secret CIA prisons and sent to languish at Guantanamo, sometimes on the flimsiest of evidence.

Even U.S. citizens suspected of terrorist activities have been dubbed “unlawful enemy combatants” and deprived of their constitutional rights. So why is the administration dragging its feet on arresting and charging Posada?

It’s not as if the evidence against Posada is seriously in dispute. In 1998, for instance, he “proudly admitted authorship of the hotel bomb attacks” to the New York Times, “describ[ing] them as acts of war intended to cripple a totalitarian regime by depriving it of foreign tourism and investment.”

He dismissed the civilian casualties as “sad” but assured the reporter that he slept “like a baby.” (When asked about these admissions in 2005 by the Miami Herald, he coyly replied, “Let’s leave it to history.”)

If all this sounds eerily familiar, it should. We’ve heard the same callous justifications for terrorism from Bin Laden and Khalid Shaikh Mohammed.

The full article is here.

Marc Emery…? Geezuz, for the love of God, or integrity, or for the sake of humour, or freedom…Leave The Canadian Alone…

The interview with Emery continues:

QUESTION: The issue of national sovereignty, which may or may not have been an issue here, seems to be what Canadians are interested in whether they support marijuana legalization or not. Can you speak to this idea of Canadian compliance with U.S. authorities related to this?

EMERY: Sovereignty is much more important in this situation. Larry Campbell, the former Mayor of Vancouver, was the keynote speaker at my Beyond Prohibition Conference in 2004. Nobody ever considered me a drug dealer. I have a wide body of acolytes and followers. It wasn’t about drugs. We were part of a political movement pushing for regulatory change.

There is clearly a difference between Canadian and American drug policy. What do you think are the implications on sovereignty here?

This has major implications if this goes ahead. This has implications on other national issues such as Quebec. This shows that Canadian citizenship has no worth. It means your country won’t stand up for you. Quebecers might choose to have a Quebec citizenship instead when they see what is happening to me. Canadian citizenship is worth a lot less than what it used to mean.

The interview, again, is here.

To repeat what Emery said—and it is vital in pointing out the sheer hypocrisy, might-is-right philosophy and the unstoppable direction of excessive enforcement:

EMERY: This is a non-violent crime they are accusing me of committing that has no victim. This is ideologically driven. The idea that they would seek to extradite me on this for a non-violent offense when there’s no one claiming harm, this is unheard of. I’ve run for political office ten times in Canada. It’s very unusual.

May all beings be happy. If Emery’s cause—the legalization of marijuana, Canadian sovereignity or whatever else you see in it—has meaning to you, do something.

When the Nazis came for the communists,
I remained silent;
I was not a communist.

When they locked up the social democrats,
I remained silent;
I was not a social democrat.

When they came for the trade unionists,
I did not speak out;
I was not a trade unionist.

When they came for the Jews,
I remained silent;
I wasn’t a Jew.

When they came for me,
there was no one left to speak out.

—Martin Niemöller (1892–1984)

May all beings be happier, more loved, and love more, and protected by community and solidarity. It’s not easy being human,

Pete

Sports! Muhammad Ali, Pelé and Team Canada 1972: Ah yes, thanks for the memories and the madness

Sunday, January 20th, 2008

I have the great privilege, excitement and pressure right now of directing a documentary on one of the greatest and most charismatic sports legends of all-time: the inimitable Muhammad Ali.

The challenge, after ten thousand books and three thousand documentaries on the man, is both daunting and and wondrous. An extraordinary talent through extraordinary times, whose intersection with history and with other famous and powerful people both defies and demands encapsulation.

When Ali uttered the famous phrase “I an’t got no quarrel with the Vietcong,” the effect was profound. Even one as unlikely as Noam Chomsky said:

“That rang serious alarm bells because it raised the question of why poor people in the United States were being forced by rich people in the United States to kill poor people in Vietnam. Putting it simply, that’s what it amounted to. And Ali put it very simply in ways that people could understand.”

And sportswriter Mark Kram indeed wrote (as quoted in Thomas Hauser’s The Lost Legacy of Muhammad Ali):

“What was laughable, if you knew anything about Ali at all, was that the literati was certain that he was a serious voice, that he knew what he was doing. He didn’t have a clue. Seldom has a public figure of such superficial depth been more wrongly perceived…”

…but Nelson Mandela said:

“Ali’s refusal to go to Vietnam and the reasons he gave made him an international hero. The news could not be shut out even by prison walls. He became a real legnd to us in prison…”

And legendary play-off slugger Reggie Jackson talked about Ali’s influence on his psyche:

“Do you have any idea what Ali meant to black people? He was the leader of a nation; the leader of black America. As a young black man, at times I was ashamed of my colour; I was ashamed of my hair. And Ali made me proud.

I’m just as happy being black now as somebody else being white, and Ali was part of that growing process.

Think about it! Do you understand what it did for black Americans to know that the most physically gifted, possibly the most handsome, and one of the most charismatic men in the world was black? Ali helped raise black people in this country out of mental slavery.

The entire experience of being black changed for millions of people because of Ali.”

Enough said…

…for now.

NEW YORK COSMOS and the great PELE

In researching the time, I saw the 2006 documentary film Once In A Lifetime: The Extraordinary Story of the New York Cosmos the other night, about the hilarious and quite incredible story of the New York Cosmos soccer team—that thanks to the signing of the legendary Pelé (and then other greats), took New York and North America by storm in the late 1970s early 80s .

Their success, incidentally, was interrupted only once, by the unlikely, yes, Vancouver Whitecaps in 1979, while I was dreaming (haplessly) about one day getting out of Bantam (age 14-15) and playing in the NHL.

If the era and the sport of soccer (or, as it should be called, football) interest you—or even if they don’t—I highly recommend the film.

Here’s a little Pelé from his earlier days in Brazil.

THE SUMMIT SERIES

But, being a Canadian, we finish with un peu de hockey—and footage from the most remarkable hockey series in history, an eight game extravaganza between Canada and the (now defunct, like the California Golden Seals) Soviet Union in September, 1972, with the Cold War still exceedingly hot.

With the first four games in Canada and the last four in the Soviet Union, the series was supposed to be a cakewalk, an eight game rout, for the NHL star-studded Canadians against the “amateur” Russians.

Russia shocked all of Canada by winning the opeing game 7-3 in Montreal, with Ken Dryden in net for the Canadians (Ken is the same Ken in the title of my second novel Understanding Ken).

And, as a sort of intermission, a live, Big Bum excerpt from the book here.

After four games in Canada, Russia was shockingly ahead, two wins to one, with one game tied.

With guantlet thrown down after the Game 1 massacre (am I mixing metaphors?), the series turned into a war of pride and ideology—and the Canadian fans had taken to extensively booing the Canadian team.

Team leader Phil Esposito’s post-game-four, on-ice, sweat-drenched, nearly swearing interview in Vancouver shamed and rallied the Canadian public in the same instance, with its passionate innocence.

Check it out here.

Canada lost the first game in Russia, as well. Then won the next two by a goal (both winners from unheralded Paul Henderson—who for good reason became a born again Christian).

Then in the final game eight, Canada fought back from a 5-3 deficit in the third period, to tie the game at 5 on a goal by my hero, Yvan Cournoyer (I was six at the time).

And then, with schools and work-places put on hold all over Canada, Paul Henderson (from Esposito), scored the winning goal (the goal of the century) that won the game for Canada with 34 seconds left in game eight (4 wins to 3 with 1 tied).

Check out J.P. Parise swinging his stick hatchet-style at the referee, the madness ensuing after the Cournoyer goal (with Canadian hockey official Alan Eagleson—who would later be indicted for ripping off the NHL pension fund, and a bunch of players to boot) going slightly beserk, and then Henderson’s legendary goal.

There you have it. You’re up to date in the world of sports/nostalgia/distraction/love and the Cold War.

Lots of love to you,

Pete

Critical Resistance and questions of Crime and Punishment

Saturday, January 19th, 2008

Thanks to Sue, here’s a link to a website called Critical Resistance, that is food for thought and questions the necessity and sanity (or insanity) of the Prison Industrial Complex. It’s mission is to abolish the system. Hm.

Here’s an excerpt from their Frequently Asked Questions.

QUESTION: But [if the Prison Industrial Complex was to be abolished], what about the murderers, rapists and pedophiles?

[A darn good question, to say the least]

Answer: Obviously, murder, rape and the sexual abuse of children are very serious problems, and obviously, acts of great harm bring up feelings of anger and fear. Given how grave these problems are, we need to examine whether locking someone in a cage is the best way to prevent these harms?

Public Policy 101 dictates that the solution needs to address the problem. It is disastrous public policy to propose ill suited solutions simply because you don’t solve the problem.

It is also important to note that of the approximately 2.5 million people locked in US prisons and jails only a very small number—about 1%—are there for these horrendous offenses. Many people do not believe that locking someone in a cage is an answer to drug addiction or poverty. If locking someone up does not address these problems, why would locking someone in a cage be any more of an effective answer to harm between people?

Prisons are not about reducing harm in our communities and in fact, our own experiences and studies have found that imprisonment actually serves to destabilize our communities. Prisons are violent institutions that only perpetuate violence and prisons as a public policy solution have failed to create safe communities.

The website is here.

Hug a stranger, expand community.

Of course, if you feel the opposite way, buy a gun, join a gang, believe the news.

For the record, I’m writing in solidarity with the worldcentric lovers on the planet.

Lots of love to you, to freedom, to expanding, to thinking—and to knowing life is damn complicated…

Pete xox

THE SONG OF CREATION

Friday, January 18th, 2008

The Rig Veda is often considered the oldest known or one of the oldest known scriptures, dated to at least 1500 BC by conservative historians, and thousands of years before that by some others.

Either way—and furthering my little thoughts from the previous blog—I’ve always loved the unknowingness of its Creation Hymn.

This Hymn to Creation’s playfulness betrays its age—although there were clearly mystics back then, too, and a few had senses of humour and humility, to boot. I’d bet some were downright wacky and jovial. Either way, its questioning essence is hardly grounds for proselytizing, thank Goddess.

And so it was.

Nor is the idea of an eternal soul grounds for proselytizing. In fact, just the opposite—an idea that says a person (the soul and its karmic body/ego/me) is attracted to what he or she is attracted to according to the evolution of said soul experiencing the latest of countless experiences in the material world.

In other words, one chooses one’s spiritual path—or non-spiritual path—according to a propensity inherent in one’s level of consciousness (clearly with a bit of environment and culture thrown in)—which sounds quite a lot like genetic propensity.

Put another way, according to the idea, I am a soul having a Pete experience, not a Pete having a soulful experience.

In fact, according to yogic philosophy, to realize and live as the soul (atma), and not the body, is liberation or moksha—or at least a lot less expensive.

Two signs you’re living more soul than body are great inner joy (ananda) and causing no harm (ahimsa). A third sign is an uncanny ability to tango.

This is diametrically opposed to the Abrahamic religions of Islam and Christianity, that believe profoundly in proselytizing by any number of means (some quite mean means); or all three Abrahamic religions (Islam, Christianity and Judaism) that see time as linear, one life as one life to be judged, and the end of the world as immanent (perhaps as early as next Wednesday).

So in wondrous bafflement (and not a little joy and hope for your joy), I give you the Creation Hymn of the Rig Veda (10, 129), at the very least 3500 years old (give or take 6 months), translated by Wendy Doniger O’Flaherty, who is probably much younger.

Becuse I felt like being important by tampering with scripture (and knowing doing so would not result in a fatwa, or even a skinnywa), I changed her whences to ‘from where’:

Who really knows? From where was it produced? From where comes this creation? The gods came afterwards, with the creation of this universe. Who then knows from where it has arisen?

From where has this creation arisen—perhaps it formed itself or perhaps it did not—the one who looks down on it, in the highest heaven, only he knows—or perhaps he does not know…

Ha! I just love that last sentence. In fact it’s no sentence at all. I just love that last liberation. It brings to mind Van Morrison’s ‘Into The Mystic.’

We were born before the wind
Also younger than the sun
Ere the bonnie boat was won
as we sailed into the mystic

Pete xo

The Declaration Of Interdependence

Thursday, January 17th, 2008

Needless to say I am one of the fakes, and this is my story
—Leonard Cohen

I was at an inspiring yoga philosophy class the other night (as always), given by Jeffrey Armstrong, and he said, paraphrasing, humans need to go beyond the Declaration of Independence to a Declaration of Interdependence.

I thought that was a lovely play on words, and a poem came into my head about not The Cycle of Dependence, but The Cycle of Interdependence—alternatively titled The Singer Sings Her Song:

Before the song
was the beat
Before the beat
was the breath
Before the breath
was no death
Before no death
was the song

If I could only hear the words! I wrote another little riddle, too—more of a Leonard Cohen then a Zen Koan, but then again more of an ice cream cone than a Leonard Cohen:

We are born unhappy that we can’t choose
Then we learn that we can choose
Then we try to learn how to choose
Then we learn that what we choose will rule our life
Then we learn that there is no cure to be found in what we choose
Then we learn to observe the chooser—which is a choice
Then we stop choosing and just watch the chooser (which is also sort of a choice, but anyway)
And then we stop coming back
because there’s nothing left to choose

In the hopefull not-too-meantime, as the world does what it has to do, I’ll try to remember, and in remembering, choose more love. So lots of love to you and yours,

Pete

THE ODD SQUAD: THROUGH A BLUE (Uniform) LENS

Tuesday, January 15th, 2008

Tonight I watched the documentary Through A Blue Lens for the first time in a few years, and it’s as powerful as ever on the potentially miserable, life-stealing side-effects of drug abuse. Made by police officers who make up part of a group call The Odd Squad, the Odd Squad mission is:

To educate the public about issues affecting the community…

It is our goal to make high-quality multimedia products that will serve as effective social marketing tools for today’s youth on such topics as drug abuse, speeding, and other social problems. We also serve as a conduit for the dissemination of information on drug-related issues.

Although I’ve written a lot (to the best of my limited ability) about the so-called War On Drugs, and how I think not increasing the conversation about decriminalization, regulation and harm reduction is in itself hypocrital and at times verging on criminal, none of that conversation for a moment denies the brutal possible effects of life as a drug addict—on the body and the spirit.

A walk through this website, across the written literature and the video sections, is profound, inspiring, chilling and heartbreaking, and surely—or at least hopefully—when it lands at the right time, a great deterrent for teenagers (or whomever) from being exposed to drugs.

At the same time, profoundly more also brutal—and in a sense violent—deaths happen as a result of legal cigarette smoking (and its legal trafficking), and violent behaviour and death (by disease and violence) from the legal consumption of alcohol.

The answer? I don’t know, but honest, open, non-politically motivated discourse would be wonderful.

May you sleep well and be happy as you are, striving—and feel loved in the process. A vice is not a crime, unless it is criminlaized. That said, a vice can be hell.

Pete x