Buddha and Trump

I remember a song from the 1970s, composed in response to the unrest in Ireland which dominated much of the news at that time.  The words of the song went something like this: "You'd never think they'd go together, but they certainly do/the combination of English muffins and Irish stew".  Writing about Trump and Buddha, an even more unlikely combination, I came up with new words to the song, during an aural daydream, as follows: "You'd never think they'd go together, and they certainly don't/egotism's dirty puddles and wisdom's font."

Poison

In a recent article, I described what I call "The Pathological Pyramid".  We have an incompetent president at the top; for several layers below we find legislators who are afraid to contravene or even criticize him, lest they be voted out of office, The bulk of the pyramid is the many hard rocks that form its base, Trump's base, the many who still support him.  How can so many Americans continue to support a man, who, upon minimal rational reflection, is so glaringly unable to be president of our nation?  Why this is so and how Buddhist thought can provide a contrast and point in the direction of a solution to our current political malaise is the subject of this essay.

A relative of mine asked me some years ago why so many Romans accepted Christianity before Emperor Constantine forced them to in the fourth century. Several centuries before, many Romans were attracted to Judaism.  The Roman gods no longer seemed pertinent.  One such seeker approached Hillel at around the time of Jesus's birth and asked him  to relate the essence of Judaism while standing on one leg.  (The Roman apparently wasn't interested in such things as dietary laws, nor, presumably, did he look forward to being circumsised; he wanted only the yolk, as it were, not the rest of the egg).  Hillel famously replied, "That which is hateful to you do not do to another.  This is the whole Torah; the rest is commentary; go and learn".

Approximately a century later, the essence of Christianity was summarized in the Saint John Gospel: "God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten son, that whosoever believeth in him will not perish, but receive eternal life."

That's why so many Romans converted.  They wanted certainty and they (seemingly) got it.  Hillel's path required that those who walk upon it have to be more or less self-directed.  The Romans who converted wanted the certainty of knowing Jesus was walking beside them and would not only guide them on their way, but forgive them when they went astray.  The wanted a god who, figuratively and literally, delivered.

Thus, Christianity appealed to many who wanted an absolute answer without having to rigorously examine whether that answer is, in fact, absolute.  As Tertullian. a third century Christian theologian wrote, "Credo quia absurdum est,"  "I believe because it is absurd".

Trump's supporters are similar.  (A striking difference is,  of course, that Jesus was a very wise man). They have accepted Trump as their savior, as it were, and ignore all evidence that indicates that they have made a poor choice.  Trump is a good businessman, and we need a good businessman in the White House.  We need to shake things up, and Trump is the man to do it.  Trump is for the little man; Trump will drain the swamp. etc.  None of these statements bears scrutiny.  Trump is the choice of those who will not think.

The Buddhist Antidote

One of the earliest symbols of Buddhism is a footprint.  This sums up the essence of this Eastern way of removing suffering: Buddhism is a path.  There is no catechism to guide you, much less a good shepherd guiding his sheep form afar; there are only guidelines on experientially proven methods for spiritual progress.  Buddha's last words of advice were "to work out your salvation with diligence."  If one goes astray, there is no possibility of divine intervention to transport you back to the path.

The goal is to eliminate greed, hate, and delusion.  Walking down a path, one has to make choices on how to continue.  Perhaps the road les traveled is the one to take.  What if there were several such roads before one?  There is no sign that says "Follow Me".  If one has made a choice that proves to be wrong, one has to think of the reasons why this is so.  The path in question, which appears to lead nowhere, might be the right one, after all.  Should one continue for some time more and risk the possibility of having gone further astray?  Should one turn back?  One has to use Buddhist guidelines to come to a decision, a decision that might be wrong, but not irretrievably wrong.

This type of analytical thinking is too difficult for Trump supporters.  They do not analyze, they simply convince themselves that they are in the right.  They are on a stony path heading for an abyss, yet they assure themselves, perhaps to a bitter end, that they are on a red carpet heading for the New Jerusalem.

Their faith in Trump is alsolute and, like theistic faiths, absolutely unverifiable as well. 

Life is ambiguous and nobody has all the answers.  Just like Trump's ego, their faith is shaky; deep down they know they might not be right, and yet they cannot entertain the possibility that they might be wrong..  They therefore demonize those ho do not share there unnuanced views.  If you believe Trump is absolutely right, his opponents must be absolutely wrong.  Absolutely wrong, is, of course, another word for evil.  This is the source of the extreme partisanship of Trump's supporters.  The Emperor is wearing the finest silks--how dare you say he's a fat, old, naked charlatan?

For those who vehemently oppose Trump, one must not follow suit and demonize his supporters.  They are all human beings, let us not forget that. It is best not to get into heated arguments with Trump supporters; one should gently point out why you disagree, and if you're not getting anywhere, talk about something else. On the other hand, one should not avoid political discussion either, since our democracy is being threatened now perhaps as never before. Respectfully asserting that tax cuts for the wealthy will likely mean that we will not be able to fund infrastructure repairs, and will likely result in cuts to Social Security and to Medicare as well, two programs that are very popular among working-class voters. It is much more important to fight for our democracy by full involvement in the political process, and, in the long term, advocate for better education and less superficial entertainment. Everyone has a Christ within, everyone is a potential Buddha. No doubts about that!  Translating that into action for society and for ourselves is undoubtedly extremely difficult, given the degree that greed, hate, and delusion are present in the world.  But one has to begin or continue the good path beginning right where one is; there is no other choice.

First Addendum: What the Buddha Said

The following is taken from the Sutta-Nipata.  These excerpts provide a vivid analysis of why that toxic partisanship is not the way to make progress!

Enquirer:         Fixed in their pet beliefs,
                        these diverse wranglers bawl--
                        "Hold this, and truth is yours,
                         Reject it and you're lost".

                          Thus they contend and dub
                          opponents "dolts" and "fools".
                          Which in the lot is right,
                          When all as experts pose?

Buddha:             Well, if dissent denotes
                           a "fool" and stupid "dolt"
                           then all are fools and dolts
                          --for each has his own view.

                          I count not that as true                      
                          which those affirm who call
                          each other "fools"--They call
                          each other so, because
                          each deems his own view "Truth".,,

                         Delight in their own views
                         Make sectaries assert 
                         that all who disagree
                         miss Purity and err.
                         
                         These divers sectaries...
                         claim Purity as theirs
                         alone, not found elsewhere.
                         Whom should the sturdiest
                         dare to call a "fool,"
                         when this invites the like
                         retort upon himself


Second Addendum

Trump supporter: 

"If Jesus Christ gets down off the cross and told  me that Trump is with Russia, I would tell him, hold on a second, I have to check with the president if it is  true.  That is how confident I feel in the president".                   

Trump:          

"I could stand in the middle of Fifth Avenue and                                 shoot somebody and still not lose voters".

Democracy:  

Yikes!

Gerard Manley Hopkins and the Present Absence of God

The great nineteenth century English poet, Gerard Manley Hopkins, wrote some of the finest religious poems in the English language. A Jesuit priest, he was indeed a man of faith, but that faith became problematic as he grew older.  Although he continued to believe, religion provided little consolation in the last years of his life.  He thought God could intervene and alleviate his increasing sense of desperation, but came to the conclusion that grace and consolation were not forthcoming,  Once a transcendent god recedes beyond the clouds and is no longer felt to be present below them, traditional forms of theism becomes- problematic indeed.  We will examine in this little essay Hopkins's inner journey from joy of God's presence to despair of His absence; two poems, one written at a time of exuberant faith, the other written two years later as doubt that God would help him began to set in, will help guide us in our understanding of that journey.

1, The First Poem: The Windhover

Gerard Manley Hopkins, the eldest of nine children, was born on July 28, 1844 into a devout, artistic Anglican family.  His father was a successful businessman, but like so many on both sides of the family, was artistically gifted as well.  In his lifetime, he published three volumes of poetry, far more publications than his son had during his lifetime; the first collection of Gerard's poems had to wait until Robert Bridges's edition of 1918--and it took a few decades after that for his poetry to gain critical acclaim.  The major theme of Hopkins's father's poetry is that the more you delved into nature, the more the presence of God becomes apparent. Gerard's poetry follows this tradition, a worldview especially evident in the poems written in the years immediately after his first great work, The Wreck of The Deutschland--e.g. God's Grandeur, Pied Beauty and the one we will now discuss, The Windhover.

The Windhover

to Christ our Lord

I caught this morning morning's minion, king-
    dom of daylight's dauphin, dapple-dawn-drawn Falcon, in his riding
    Of the rolling level underneath him steady air, and striding
High there, how he rung upon the rein of a wimpling wing
in his ecstacy! then off, off forth on swing,
    As a skate's heel sweeps smooth on a bow-bend: the hurl and gliding
     Rebuffed the big wind. My heart in hiding
Stirred for a bird,--the achieve of, the mastery of the thing!

Brute beauty and valour and act, oh, air, pride, plume, here
   Buckle! And the fire that breaks from thee then, a billion
Times told lovelier, more dangerous, O my chevalier!

   No wonder of it: sheer plod makes plough down sillion
Shine, and blue-bleak embers, ah my dear,
   Fall, gall themselves, and gash god-vermillion.

This is one of the most beautiful religious poem in the English language.  Written in 1877, nine years after Hopkins's conversion to Catholicism, (we will discuss possible reasons for this conversion in a later essay), the poem exudes the joyous experience of faith.  Hopkins, who studied to become a Jesuit beginning in 1868, was at the time of this poem soon to be a fully ordained Jesuit priest, having solemnly professed a life of poverty, chastity, and obedience.  (His ordination took place in September of 1877.)  This was a happy time for Hopkins, the overwork and waning enthusiasm of his many assignments were all in the future.

We will concentrate on the content here, in accordance with the subject of this essay, and ignore the poem's dazzling technique, which, admittedly, is not easy to do.

Hopkins not only adored the God behind nature, but nature as well; both loves are in evidence here.  In the octet, we are confronted with an unforgettable image of the windhover soaring above both Hopkins's and the reader's heads.  It is a fine example of what Hopkins referred to as inscape, a dazzlingly unique phenomenon of nature.

The windhover is a symbol as well, a symbol of transcendence. The majestic bird is like an angel, soaring above the fray of human suffering, closer to God indeed, yet below the holy person who has passed through the ordeal  of inner and outer temptations with his soul intact.  Its transcendent beauty is, however, breathtaking.  "My heart in hiding/Stirred for a bird"--it is not an exaggeration if we see Hopkins referring to himself here.  That his heart is in hiding can refer to the inner, recondite nature of the poet as well as to the disappearance of individuality as one forgets everything except the blissful image above one.

The wings of the windhover remind one of the Holy Ghost as depicted in the final three lines of Hopkins's great poem, God's Grandeur:

   Oh, morning, at the brown brink eastwards, springs--
Because the Holy Ghost over the bent
   World broods with warm breast and with ah! bright wings.

In the sestet, however, the windhover is identified with Christ.  Christ is a "billion times more lovelier and more dangerous," because He comes down from the sky and suffers like the rest of us.  The weight of the Cross crushes Him, but as it does we see, with the eye of the spirit, resurrection, symbolized in the poem by  the gash of gold-vermillion as blue-bleak embers fall.  This flash of golden light is the very essence of life, the Zen center of reality, far superior to the wondrous vision of the windhover, soaring above us in innocent majesty.

A profound poem, a joyful poem, a dazzling poem indeed.

We will now compare it to a poem that Hopkins wrote two years later, in 1879.

2. The Second Poem: Andromeda

Now Time's Andromeda on this rock rude,
With not her either beauty's equal or
Her injury's, looks off by both horns of shore,
Her flower, her piece of being, doomed dragon food.

Time past she has been attempted and pursued
By many blows and banes; but now hears roar
A wilder beast from West than all were, more
Rife in her wrongs, more lawless, and more lewd.

Her Perseus linger and leave her to her extremes?--
Pillowy air he treads a time and hangs
His thought on her, forsaken that she seems,

All while her patience, morselled into pangs,
Mounts; then to alight disarming, no one dreams,
With Gorgan's gear and barebill/thongs and fangs.

This poem, written in 1879, two years after The Windhover illustrates Hopkins's waning optimism.  In my view, as we shall see in a future essay, Hopkins became a priest to chiefly to curb his sensual nature.  Plagued by guilt by his sexual attraction to males at a time when there was a good deal more social opprobrium relating to what we now call homosexuality than there is now, Hopkins sought refuge in grace from God, obtained after conquering his desires through obedience, chastity, and poverty.  By 1879, he was discovering that the hard, time-consuming work as a Jesuit left little time for his first love, poetry; not only that, he was beginning to discover that he did not have a calling for parish work or even for teaching. 

This poem has been interpreted by many as an allegory depicting the trials of the Church, awaiting redemption in an evil world.  I very much disagree with this view.  As I have pointed out on several occasions, nearly all of Hopkins's poems have strong autobiographical elements; the poem under discussion is no exception,  Andromeda is best understood as an allegory of Hopkins's inner life as well as an allegory of he human condition as he saw it.

The poem is not a favorite in the canon of the poet.  Its allegorical nature renders it less direct; it needs interpretation more than other poems of Hopkins.  Although the poem evinces the poet's great musicality, the last line, however, can fall a little flat on the ear at first.  Once the initial mystery of "thongs and fangs" are removed, however, the beauty of this poem in its entirety becomes apparent.

This is the only major poem by Hopkins whose subject is derived from Greek mythology; we begin with a brief summary of the Andromeda myth.

Andromda, was he daughter of Cepheus, an Ethiopian king, and his wife, Cassiopeia.  When her mother claimed that Andromeda was more beautiful than the Nereids, nymphs sacred to Poseidon, the latter, in order to punish Cassiopeia's hubris, sent the sea monster, Cetus, to ravage Ethiopia.  Cepheus has his daughter chained to a rock as a sacrifice to Cetus, hoping to thus appease the monster and prevent further destruction.  Perseus, however, arrives just in time; he slays Cetus and saves Andromeda.

As mentioned earlier, I consider this poem to be a metaphor of the poet's inner life.  Hopkins saw himself as a human being threatened by a host of devils, whose only hope was the slaying of those demons by divine intervention.  A female alter ego makes a frequent appearance in Hopkins's poems--a critic, for instance, has asserted that the Margaret in Hopkins's famous "Spring and Fall" poem is the poet himself. (I will provide a more striking example of the cross-identification in a further essay.)

Andromeda depicts Hopkins's troubled inner life.  He/she is "Time's Andromeda" since the troubles that beset him/her are temporal; if the trials are overcome on Earth, eternal, trouble-free life awaits.  Andromeda is, however, completely powerless to work out her salvation by herself, a plight which is symbolized by her being chained to a rock.  She has endured and defeated demons in the past; now however, she is in mortal and perhaps even in immortal danger.

What is the identity of her present nemesis, the "wilder beast from West?"  Perhaps this beast represents several entities, such as the onslaught of science and the decreasing power of dogma and tradition, as well as decreasing inhibitions, especially sexual inhibitions, as Western culture becomes more and more secular.

It is important to note that the "her" in line eight refers to the beast and not to Andromeda.  I interpret the feminine pronoun as referring to Hopkins's sensual nature.  She is no ascetic; she is not even Catholic, but is a lawless beast.  Note, the sexual reference: she is lewd.  She is everything that Andromeda, as it were, secretly desires, desires which so frighten her that she, as it were again, becomes a priest.

Andromeda/Hopkins is in dire straits.  Will Perseus/Christ linger and leave her to her extremes?  The concluding lines leave everything in suspension.  Perseus/Christ is able to slay the dragon with the Gorgan's head/Cross, but why the  tortuous delay?

By means of his magic sandals, the hero floats on the "pillowy air" above the chained prisoner.  He represents Christ, the windhover of the first poem, a majestic being hovering overhead.  In the first poem, however, Christ comes down to Earth, suffers and redeems humanity.  Not here; the savior figure, still all-powerful and able to defeat all enemies, remains a transcendent vision overhead, poised to intervene in suffering humanity, but for some reason does not do so.

(A possible solution to Hopkins's increasing spiritual crisis, as well as to our own, is indicated by the "then" in the penultimate line of the poem.  "No one dreams" that help is possible in a state of extreme anxiety, such as that of the woman portrayed in the poem.  I am reminded of the final words attributed to the Buddha: Seek your salvation with diligence.  It is impossible to proceed along this path in a state of unbearable mental duress.  A degree of equanimity must be obtained first.

The last line brings home Hopkins's view of his own abandonment and that of besieged humanity as well.  Perseus's weapon in the sky is opposed to the bare bill of the monster on Earth; the thongs--the winged sandals--the means by which Perseus can come down to Earth, sre opposed to the fangs threatening Andromeda.  The desperate situation demands an immediate intervention; yet the poem leaves us with the assertion hat "no one dreams" that it will come anytime soon.

Thus, for practical purposes, God might as well not be there.  Perhaps the belief that God can intervene but won't is even worse, since abandonment at the hands of a loving and just deity can increase a sense of unworthiness and guilt on the part of the one who feels hopelessly lost.  Hopkins had faith in the Catholic God to the very end of his life; however,  that God, as Hopkins's final sonnets attest,  became a remote entity to whom he wrote "dead letters" and "who lived alas! away."

Hopkins's needs for a balance between flesh and spirit, recognition and solitude, were not met.  His life became increasing afflicted by self-loathing.  One imagines that with a little bit of loving, mortal intervention might have brought much relief to a man who saw himself as Andromeda chained to a rock, about to be devoured by a monster.  His poems, however, including the ones in which he expresses despair, remain as great works of art.  It is unfortunate that this great poet died without an inkling of the joys that his poetry has provided to generations that came after him, delights it shall, undoubtedly, continue to provide to generations to come.