Showing posts with label republican. Show all posts
Showing posts with label republican. Show all posts

Saturday, July 30, 2016

Can Yoga Trump Politics?

Well, it seems America has safely got past both political parties' conventions. What a time we live in! The voices of America are at fevered pitch, shouting irrational imprecations from all sides. It seems the Western world is having a spasm of liberal regrets; our egalitarian principles strained under the dark clouds of fear, envy, violence, and hatred as if uninvited "guests" are attempting to crash the gates of a formerly decorous and homogeneous "party." The civil niceties of public debate, once secure in white shirts and club ties, have abandoned themselves to the jostling rainbow crowd! (ok, a slight exaggeration: democracy has always been messy, noisy, and rancorous!) Globalism, once the great "white hope" of liberalism (free trade, freer movement of peoples) is now under attack for it is seen to benefit the few at the expense of the many and at the cost of legitimate national interests.

A yogi is committed to the summons of Patanjali (of the "Yoga Sutras") to seek the calm center within: where likes and dislikes, opinions and emotions, subside into the bliss beneath all seeming.

On the left, the yogi finds "ira" (the upward moving channel in the astral spine--associated with inhalation) which can be expressed outwardly, as the power of love and compassion; on the right, the "pingala" channel (downward moving away from outward involvement--cause of the exhalation), expressing non-attachment and acceptance of the law of karma! Mercy and justice: two sides of a coin. 

What's a yogi to do?

Paramhansa Yogananda aligned himself with the (political) party of Abraham Lincoln! He declined to express his thoughts, except as "concerned," regarding FDR: the father of social security, progenitor of how government can help people in need, and, in later decades, manifested as Welfare entitlements; more recently, Obamacare! Yogananda put it this way (as many have also): while it's fine and good to feed someone hungry, it is better to give him a job and better yet an education.

Jesus Christ, too, actually said these words: "The poor ye shall have always...." Yet the Bhagavad Gita avers that the yogi feels "the pangs of sorrow and joy of all men." When Jesus Christ stated that "those who have, more will be given; to those with little, what they have will be taken away" one might think his words were a plank in the Republican platform! In all fairness, yet apropos in any case, is Paramhansa Yogananda's explanation for Jesus' strange sounding words: those who put out energy will receive energy back in spades; those who do not, will lose what little they have. Or, as one hears so often with a twang and a smile, "Da Lord helps dems who helps demselves!"  And Jesus also said that as often as we feed the poor, clothe the naked, visit those in prison, etc. we do it to Him!

How, ever, can a yogi reconcile these seemingly opposite principles and precepts?

Life would be unbearable if we did not believe in and understand the law of karma: cause and effect. If one cannot believe that he can improve his life, he will sink into despair. Spiritually as well as materially, one must put out the effort and the energy to lift ourselves. Even if, in the end, and in response to our efforts, help comes from "above" (whether divine or governmental), no one can put us through school against our will; no one can make us healthy against our will; no one can do an excellent job except ourselves. The cycle of initiative creates a magnetism that draws a universal and supportive response--from whatever source(s). This is the basis for yoga (and meditation) itself. [Dogmatic Christians sometimes excoriate yoga practice as being presumptuous citing St. Paul, "Not by works alone...but by grace." Common sense and experience show us, however, that by our efforts we can attract success: material AND spiritual!]

And thus we find (yet again and again), how the truth lies, often hidden, in the middle. The art of compromise is the art of life itself. Mercy and justice must, like Queen and King, rule together the kingdom of the body politic.

The party lines of both parties have their own, internal justifications, even as they possess their own delusive, unexamined biases or agendas. On just a few of the issues being shouted consider such pairs of opposites as:

America, as any other country, must have control over who enters it. Yet we benefit from the influx of other peoples. At the same time, and given the chaos and hatred in the world, we surely have a right to exclude those who intend or would do us harm.

In the past two centuries, successful groups of immigrants have integrated into the culture of America by learning our common language and respecting and integrating some of our (better) customs even as they honor and preserve their own.

Other industrialized countries surely by now, a half century after the last world war, and decades after the so-called "fall" of communism, ought to contribute to the cost of their own defense (assuming they do not, for I don't really know the facts.)

America's many adventures into places like Vietnam, central America, Afghanistan, and the Middle East have been less than successful and too often self-serving, peppered with the all-too-often corruption of values that war provides opportunities for. Even if you believe that we "meant well," violence begets violence and should be employed sparingly and with mercy. That we have ignited a push back, and even hatred, in playing the "Great Game," is hardly surprising.

Examples of what I view as our past mistakes (owing perhaps to our hubris, naivete, or hidden, self-serving motives) include: while it was our duty to track down Osama Bin Laden, did we really have to take on the Taliban (we still haven't won that war); Saddam Hussein! What a tragedy that under the guise of "weapons of mass destruction" we convinced ourselves (as a nation and our entire Congress) to go after the guy. Countless, endless and continuing suffering has been the result. Never mind the billions or trillions of dollars of added national debt. Was this adventure to finish what the (then) president's father didn't? Was it to secure oil that subsequent years have shown we don't actually need?

Vietnam, as with Iraq, Afghanistan and other adventures, had for its failing that the locals didn't want our "help" (destroying their country and their people). In most cases, in fact, they haven't "deserved" being rescued, having their own scores to settle with each other. Yes, it's hard to watch others suffer under corrupt regimes, I agree.

Communism fell for three reasons: one, the West had the strength to confront it on its own terms, making war a poor choice for both sides; two, our very prosperity and freedom (our ideals) are in tune with righteousness and with the age in which we live and thus proved far too magnetic; and three, it was based on false (and godless) precepts. If we had applied these principles to contain and confront the injustices of Saddam, Bin Laden, Ho Chi Minh and others, while yet offering an attractive alternative to their suffering peoples (providing aid, refuge, education etc.) we would have won the only thing worth winning: people's hearts and minds.

Of course we must defend ourselves from those who hate and who attack us, yet have we examined honestly the reasons we are so hated? On the other hand, do not the peoples of other nations vote with their feet in wanting to come here, even if they, like ourselves, take issue with the political or military past actions or policies of our country?

And yes, Hillary, we should be hopeful and positive! Our nation and its ideals give to us strength in righteousness, prosperity in our creative energies, and joy in our freedoms. "Greatest nation on earth" is rather boastful for my tastes, but the influence of America, for better or worse, upon the rest of the world is undeniable. The lure of success and freedom is irresistible. These are our strengths. We should live them here at home, first; their example is, and has always been, the beacon of light and hope to others. But they, like we, must earn their freedom by their own self-effort.

I prefer compassion over the strict justice of karma but I question how much and how long western societies can offer extensive and liberal safety nets and entitlements in the face of the energy, creativity, and ambitions of other nations who are "coming up" and who, as a result, are equalizing prosperity around the world. Our standard of living is, so I am told and so it seems to me, declining as that of other nations is rising. It all has to balance out (to zero). Do entitlements help people or do they force a resented dependency upon them?

I'm certainly in favor of the idealistic society that enjoys prosperity and health for all but the question here is the issue of "idealistic." How productive must an economy be to afford the "ideal" safety nets? Even if it were to be achieved, would the result itself prove to be "idealistic?"

You see, in the final analysis, it is not governments that create a prosperous, secure, and healthy society, but individuals: their hard work; creativity; initiative and ability to work together for the common good. Government acts as a moderator and fulcrum that provides protection, justice, and balances the seemingly opposing interests of people or groups of people with shared interests. (Think the classic capital vs labor!)

If a nation becomes so materially successful that it can offer the perks of universal health care and guaranteed minimum income, well, fine but these things, like personal health, are never guaranteed and must never eclipse self-effort and personal responsibility for one's life. 

And, they have their own cost. Becoming dependent on government largess and the promises of politicians is a recipe (long-term) for revolution: for passivity breeds resentment and there is no joy in it beyond going to sleep or enjoying an uneasy comfort. By contrast, initiative, even in the face of hardship or disadvantages, may take courage and commitment, but in putting out energy for self-improvement we experience confidence, satisfaction and joy. I remember an Ananda T-shirt years ago with the slogan: "Energy and Joy go Hand in Hand."

As a yogi for whom the lessons of India's beloved scripture, the Bhagavad Gita, is taken to heart one of its initial precepts is that we must fight the "battle of life." Sublimating our lower, passive nature into an upward flow of energy towards Self-realization: this is the hue and cry of Krishna to those waking up to life's realities. It's message does not include pretending we can attack everyone else's injustices around the world using brute force.

Returning now, for a moment, to the current elections, we yogis do not separate the "energy," the intention, or the consciousness of the individuals who seek to represent us from their stated aims. The message cannot be separated from the messenger. The extent to which "the end justifies the means" is forever humanity's dilemma. Voting for character (nobility, compassion, universality, acceptance, intelligence and goodwill) should be the ideal yardstick by which we weigh our minuscule role as voters. Both Republican and Democrat ideals are, in principle, true and worthwhile: each holding the other in check. I'd rather have a president with intelligence, goodwill and integrity, regardless of political affiliation because in our country effective power (I prefer "influence") is subject to checks and balances and requires compromise. 

Life, being by its nature "dual," a mixture of good and evil vying constantly for supremacy, demands that we remain ever awake to do what is right and just, as well as merciful. Would that prosperous nations place more emphasis on helping other lesser fortunate nations even as we protect ourselves from their destructive tendencies. A new "Marshall Plan" would do this ravaged planet some good and there would be work aplenty: from healing nature to healing wounds and educating minds, there is no lack of positive outlets for humanity's creative energies. It is not hunger or ill health that is life's scourge so much as lack of a creative and productive outlets for one's energies. I think of the millions of under employed and unemployed youth worldwide and despair for the lack of opportunities to engage their imagination, creativity and commitment. And yet, there is SO much to be done: reinventing agriculture; enlightened self-interest for business; holistic education; educated and self-care driven health care, nothing less than a revolution in both life style and consciousness awaits the awakening of our courage and wisdom.

Whether donkey or elephant, we must share this nation and this planet and so let's look for the positive and the truth in one another's firmly held precepts even as we commit ourselves to living our ideals. Personalities are but stand ins for the consciousness that animates them.

Joy to you,

Swami Hrimananda


Monday, October 21, 2013

Who Will Win? Republicans or Democrats?

Sometimes they are difficult to tell one from the other. But these days, so polarized are they that it isn’t quite so difficult. Nonetheless to define or characterize them is not easy. There are high-minded, noble partisans and there are the others, as diverse as human nature can be. If I left it at that, I wouldn’t have an article to write, however, And for those who stick with me on this, I assure you there’s point somewhere to be made.

Republicans tend to describe themselves as conservatives: fiscal conservatives, traditional values, mainline religion, God and country first, and finally, “hands off my stuff!” (my business, my family, etc.) Democrats tend to be associated with plurality, diversity, acceptance of alternative lifestyles, compassionate and desirous to help those in need. Well, I know that just as in the rest of politics we could split hairs and argue about these distinctions but I ask, if I must, for your forbearance for the sake brevity and simplicity, lest whatever point I might have, be buried in the “ifs, ands, and buts.”

Conservative, status quo and tradition has been on the run since the very dawn of modernism. Perhaps it began with the Italian Renaissance when men of genius and curiosity stepped out the darkness of medieval consciousness and began boldly to explore the natural world of the human body, biology, astronomy, non-religious philosophy, chemistry and much more. Hot on its heels came the great Protestant revolution (beginning with Martin Luther) and simultaneously the age of world exploration and conquest. The medieval era of unchanging tradition and rigid social and religious castes and customs began to crumble. Advances in knowledge, technology, arts, sciences, medicine and, of course, war, gave birth to the hope for freedom with the appearance of the initially weak but dynamic 13 colonies, now the United States of America.
Change and innovation by men and women of genius, courage, and commitment have been upsetting conservative bastions of “this is how it’s always been” in every generation since!

Still, orthodoxy and conservatism have always managed to regain the reins of power even if new ideas and new forms of populist activism temporarily wrested those reins away. Indeed, in the halls of power, this is the reason most of typically see little difference between the blues and the reds. Once in power, it’s “the same old, same old” song.

The reason the blues and the reds alternate in dominance every so many years is that each has a piece of the trending puzzle of consciousness and change. By definition, neither will ever in the course of history win permanently and forever. From the point of view of consciousness and metaphysical truths, Democrats represent the growing awareness, initiative and energy of the common man, flinging off the shackles of caste and of the past. We are living in the early stages of a long cycle (thousands of years) during which human consciousness (slowly at first, and then with increasing intensity) grows in the awareness of individuality, personal initiative, and an internal yardstick of right action, increasingly independent from external or traditional laws, customs, or forms.

Republicans represent the stability inherent in the calm acceptance of the law (law of karma and right action). “The more things change, the more they stay the same.” With experience and wisdom, a person who early in life was a maverick finds that he becomes, later in life, a conservative. This is for the simple reason that some people realize that basic truths of behavior don’t really change. One might find, later in life, that the most valuable things in life aren’t money or pleasure, but health and friendship—just to describe one common realization.

A person who starts adult life as a stickler for the rules and apt to pounce on those who don’t uphold the “ol-time religion” (whether ethics, politics, caste, or religion) may, later in life, after some struggles and disillusionment, relax and become more accepting of others’ realities and their need to find their own way in life.

Our government today is in a great crises. What is to come will affect not only the fortunes of this nation but of many nations, some of whom share our predicament, and others who will be affected by it. We are bankrupt. The momentum of habit, the existence of ignorance, and the paralysis of fear of change, both in this country and abroad, have kept the masses from hearing the little boy whimpering, “The emperor (dollar) has no clothes!”

The debt crises has galvanized some Republicans over Obamacare for, among other reasons, the fear that it will create an exponential increase in mandated federal entitlements at a time in history, regardless of Obamacare’s long overdue status and intrinsic merits, when it could be the proverbial “straw” which when added to our deficits and consequent debt will topple the dollar into the dustbin and trigger a financial and commercial collapse never before seen in the history of the world.

With so many economies of developed countries in equivalent or worse shape, only blind, habitual, and fear-anchored “faith” in the dollar holds the world’s fragile “fiat” fictionalized trading and lending activities in an evanescent and virtual chimera.

Add to this a wide range of concerns about global warming, declining energy and other natural resources, erosion of water, air and soil quality, exponential increases in population, and the potential for pandemics or mega-cataclysms, one can see why artists in the entertainment and creative arts have produced, for decades now, an unending parade of futuristic movies and books depicting a depleted, ugly and sterile earth, devoid of all but a handful of humans living like beasts! Warning or reality?

Yet millions hope for a better world. Millions associate themselves with trends, ideas, organizations and a culture of stewardship for the earth and responsibility to be channels for the descent of an expanded consciousness from above.

If the Republicans “win” it won’t be against Obamacare but “for” the need to rein in government spending. This goal is now impossible, however. Voters don’t have a clue, any more than their on-paper representatives. No one has the moral authority or political power to stop the train wreck that is coming. The only politically feasible option is to let the government careen out of control and bottom out. Only then will the voters stop arguing about entitlements; the military industrial–industrial complex be temporarily paralyzed; and the pork barrel farm and industry subsidies will shrivel up like crops in a draught. Just imagine, however, the consequences.

The power of big government will be permanently shaken, though in time it will attempt to bestir itself to its former glory. But like the zig-zagging chart of the Dow-Jones Industrials, which though it regains some of its value, the overall trend is southward, or the mad beast who keeps getting back up and shot again but finally succumbs, the long term trend of destiny shines on the individual and on smaller groupings of people. Though I suspect a dark period of “Big Brother” is yet to come, no matter how bleak the winter of our discontent, the Spring of individual initiative is the real hope for a better world.

Blue and Red will always have parts to play in the drama of human affairs. We mustn’t fuss so overly much over their their ever-changing ascendancies and seeming demise. Nor yet will the world end anytime soon.

Have faith not in the dollar of matter but in the gold of Divine Love, Divine Will, and the Divine Presence which, as Jesus and the great ones of east and west have always proclaimed is the “good news” and is the “truth that shall make us free.” Meditation offers the most effective way that anyone, anywhere, and anytime can use to find these pearls “of great price.” Move away from the city if you can. Grow your own food, but in all circumstances, associate with people of like-mind, and you will have a wealth more precious than a king’s ransom.

Joy to you,

Swami Hrimananda!

Tuesday, July 3, 2012

4th of July Reflections



Fourth of July for Yogis!
Which is Better: Republican or Democrat?

I would venture to say that most of us who are practitioners and proponents of the practices and precepts of yoga are overwhelmingly self-identified as Democrats. While yoga is all but synonymous with the so-called “New Age” or with the “Green Movement,” yoga itself is as “old as the hills” and teaches precepts, morals and ethics that are unquestionably traditional (and universal). The cliché, “Even the devil quotes the scriptures,” is as true for yoga as it is for Bible thumpers. We tend to view reality through the filter of our own tendencies and biases, even in our search for truth.

Consider that conservatism in its emphasis upon tradition and the status quo represents the caution that derives from an understanding that fundamental values never change and that change for the sake of change often derives from restlessness and infatuation with novelty both for its own sake and as an excuse to reject reality as it is (or at least due to ignorance, inexperience, or rebelliousness). Conservatism in American culture emphasizes the need and opportunity for each person to take responsibility for himself whether in failure or success. To that end, the conservative ethos distrusts government intervention. Of course we know that under the banner of such values can hide selfishness, greed, and a lack of compassion by those in power and wealth whose status is threatened by any effort on those less privileged to assert themselves.

Democratic values emphasize individual worth, too, of course. But here the emphasis is tempered by the inclusion of the good of all arising from compassion and desire to share the freedom and prosperity with those less fortunate. Such compassion is clearly a fundamental value. One of the core differences lies in the role of government to effectuate justice and promote freedom and prosperity. In truth the difference is more ephemeral than real, since both political parties have initiated many government reforms, policies, and programs to one end or another for the betterment of those less fortunate.

Paramhansa Yogananda, the legendary master of yoga and author of the world renowned classic, Autobiography of a Yogi, stated he was a Republican, a member of the party of Abraham Lincoln. He decried the seed planted by President Franklin D. Roosevelt during the Great Depression which was to sprout into what he might (had he lived longer) have also termed the modern “Welfare State.” Every few years there’s some movement to reform the gargantuan entitlement systems that have their origins in FDR’s seemingly compassionate desire to create safety nets through social security and government funded work projects. 


Even the pressing issue of health care in the United States has as its core issue the tension between the need for individual initiative, participation and responsibility, and the compelling social value and obligation to help those less fortunate. A health care system that simply dispenses care without thought of individual initiative is, let’s face it, unaffordable and, given the limitations inherent in the scarcity of resources, therefore unfair, as perhaps everyone may get something but many have too little and quality suffers deplorably. By contrast, a health care system based solely on individual initiative and financial wherewithal isn’t a health care system at all and is both unfair in that many suffer needlessly when even but “reasonable” acts of sharing and compassion would alleviate much suffering.

Those who practice yoga (the term which more correctly refers to meditation than to physical exercises) know full well that no one can do it for you. No one can “make” you meditate or practice yoga poses. The intention, the desire, the motivation, and, yes, the grace to practice disciplines of bodily, mental and emotional self-control, offering the ego into the Spirit can only come from within — just like creativity, ambition and any number of impulses that bring health, success, and happiness to the human spirit. At the same time, almost no one would practice yoga if others didn’t share the art and science selflessly. This starts with the rishis and great masters of yoga and includes many, if not most, yoga teachers who serve without material recompense.


Jesus Christ said, as if running on the Republican ticket, “To those who have, more will be given, and to those who lack, that which they have will be taken.” Energy attracts success; lack breeds inertia. Only the spark of desire can ignite the fuel of Life Force to drive the engine of self-effort towards fulfillment and self-improvement. Government assistance can spark or enhance self-effort in one but stifle it in another. Entitlement is the necessary legal and social consequence of legislated assistance which tends to dehumanize its recipients and rob them of the opportunity of giving back or of attracting it by merit. This fact alone doesn’t necessarily mean that it isn’t the obligation of society to render aid to others in need, however.

It has well said that to feed a man who is hungry is to allay his hunger for a few hours; to teach a man to feed himself (through a skill, e.g.) is yet a greater gift; to open the heart and mind of another to the power of the universe (of Spirit) is the greatest gift. Jesus Christ openly counseled the value of compassion, of feeding the hungry, clothing the naked, visiting the sick and imprisoned.

So, you see, it’s a spectrum that, once we exclude the extremes of heartless insensitivity or naked greed as well as the useless bleeding heart effort to save others from themselves (Jesus said, “The poor ye shall have always….”) against even their own will (for which they will only “bite the hand that feeds them”), we see that one’s attitude derives from one’s individual temperament. Thus it is that you can be either a Republican or Democrat in good faith, goodwill, and in good conscience as a practitioner of yoga. I suppose it could be said the former is more masculine (emphasizing justice) and the latter more feminine (emphasizing mercy). But of course someone is sure to object to that analogy!

A Republican yogi might be more inclined towards valuing self-discipline and the ten commandments of Patanjali’s Yoga Sutras (the “yamas,” rules of self-restraint, and the “niyamas,” the rules of right behavior). He might tend to think in terms of karma and reincarnation wherein one’s past actions lay the groundwork for one’s present circumstances and inclinations and against which only self-effort (united to Divine grace) can lift us from the consequences of past actions. This yogi would tend to see withdrawal from the ways of the world and nonattachment as guiding precepts. Ego-transcendence and desirelessness would be important values and practices. Such a one might feel in tune with Krishna’s statement in the Bhagavad Gita that “it is better to fail in the effort to perform one’s own dharma (duty) then to succeed in performing the duties of another.” If this yogi becomes too focused on these values however, he may become cold, ruthless, unfeeling, and insensitive to the needs of others. Yogis are cautioned that without the balancing qualities of the heart the ego becomes inflated and the yogi may be tempted to seek yogic powers rather than soul freedom in God.

A Democratic yogi would tend to go more by heart, by devotion, by seeing God in all. Krishna counsels us the “Gita” that a true yogi feels the joys and sorrows of all as her own. She would understand the need to expand her sympathies and consciousness to embrace the whole world as her own true Self. Thus expansion of consciousness through the heart (rather than annihilation of ego through mental effort and will power) would be the preferred path to freedom by the Democratic yogi. She might, however, tend to rescue others, to do things for them that they ought best to do for themselves. She might find herself subject to mood swings, from enthusiasm and compassion to self-doubt, depression, and self-induglence unless she is guided calmly by reason and wisdom and avoids becoming too attached to individuals or particulars.

Of course I am stretching a point and placing the tongue securely in the cheekiness of the eye’s twinkle! For what unites both of these is the wisdom to respond to life’s opportunities, challenges and perceptions with the flow of God’s grace, whether taking the form of justice or compassion. For a mother, too, must learn to discipline her children even as a father must, at times, act with mercy. For in our souls we are neither mother nor father. The middle path (which indeed is found in the spine of the yogi!) necessarily activates wisdom, compassion, and practicality in measures appropriate to the rising current of Life Force of our own karmic needs.

“Oh, Arjuna, be thou a yogi!” Eschew superficial self-limiting identities such as “democrat” or “republican.” While American culture inclines perhaps more to individual liberties and self-initiative, we also embody a spirit of cooperation and enlightened reason, guided by God. Such is the grace and wisdom of our founding Fathers. We have much to celebrate and be thankful for in our heritage and culture, but also much yet to learn and much effort needed to balance justice with mercy.

May we understand that true freedom is freedom from delusion and is found only in the transcendent, redeeming power of Oneness in God. As chains cannot bind the human spirit neither can personal liberties to express desire driven likes and dislikes free the soul. Let us seek freedom of the soul and share the bounty of our liberty with all.

Blessings to you this 4th of July!
Nayaswami Hriman