Hic Cantat Roma in Aeternam: Two Examples of Great Music Inspired by Roman History

A few days ago, I heard on National Public Radio an interview with Mary Beard, who is a professor of classics at Cambridge.  The occasion was the appearance of her book, SPQR,  (Senatus et Populusque Romanus,  The Senate and People of Rome), in paperback.  (When I read a positive review of the book in The Economist, I obtained a copy and read it straightaway—it is a hard book to put down!  I highly recommend it; its combination of interesting material and good writing is irresistible.)  At the very end of the interview, she was asked which work of fiction or art based of Roman history especially impressed her.  I, Claudius, a BBC adaptation from the 1970s of Robert Graves novel of historical fiction, was her response.  She acknowledged that much in the series was historically inaccurate, but it was fun.  I remember the series well; my wife and I didn’t miss an episode—We completely agree with Professor Beard’s assessment.

Immediately after the interview was over, I began to think of works with Roman themes that fascinate me the most.  I will now present two of them, both from opera.  In contrast to I, Claudius, with its humor and campy elements, these two examples are very serious—and very moving.

First Example: Seneca’s Death Scene from Claudio Monteverdi’s Opera, L'incoronazione di Poppea

L'incoronazione di Poppea, first performed in  1643, is one of the two earliest operatic masterpieces in the repertoire, the other being Orfeo, an earlier work by the same composer, Claudio Monteverdi, (1567-1643).  The scene discussed here  begins after Seneca received the news that Nero has ordered him to commit suicide because of the philosopher's objections to the emperor’s plan to abandon his current wife and make the ambitious Poppea empress.  (Seneca was indeed ordered to commit suicide in 65 CE, but the order had nothing to do with Poppea; Nero suspected Seneca's  participation in a plot to assassinate him.  L'incoronazione begins a long tradition in opera based on historical events, a tradition which emphasizes dramatic effect over historical accuracy.)

The Russian bass Denis Sedov gives a moving performance of Seneca in the YouTube clip which I have provided.  Seneca,  a stoic philosopher, was expected—by himself and by his students—to face death with equanimity.  In Sedov’s interpretation, it is clear that Seneca will not demure—nevertheless, impending death fills him with anguish.  It will not be easy, even for him. Seneca relates that the anguish of death is brief, and that the soul will fly to Olympus, its true home.  But Sedov's facial expression indicates that Seneca doubts whether this is true, which gives the interpretation a modern aspect.  A beautiful voice and great acting skills--just what is needed here. This singer delivers--how touching, for instance, is his depiction of Seneca silently saying farewell to life, first by picking up a piece of fruit off the ground and kissing it, and then by lovingly touching one of his beloved books. The quiet dignity of Monteverdi's music and the quality of this performance are remarkable. The bass’s voice and acting abilities significantly help to make this a masterful performance.  (The only criticism I have is that the youthful Mr. Sedov should have been made to look older—Seneca was in his late sixties—a veritable old man by Roman standards—at the time of his death.  A 'youthful Stoic philosopher,' at least when depicted on stage, strikes me as being something of an oxymoron.)

What I find most riveting about this music is the “Non morir, Seneca” section, sung by Seneca’s pupils.  Its ascending chromaticisms have a searing effect on the listener.  I would translate "Non morir, Seneca" as “Please don’t die, Seneca”.  This “Please don’t die” motif strikes me as being universal, an appropriately poignant "unheard" accompaniment to all those please-don’t-dies that have been said at the deathbed of loved ones over the centuries.  But die they do.

Thank you very much, Mr. Sedov, for putting your stellar performance on YouTube!

Second Example: Act 1, Scene 7 from Handel’s Giulio Cesare

The prolific George Frederick Handel, (1685-1759), wrote forty-two operas from 1705 until 1742.  (By 1742, the enthusiasm for Italian opera had  waned in England; Handel, as we all know, thereupon turned his attention to the composition of oratorios in English.) Giulio Cesare was composed in 1724; it was a success then, and is arguably the most successful Baroque opera in the current repertoire.

Handel was a first-rate melodist, a first-rate instrumentalist, and, as this example so amply proves, a first-rate dramatist as well.  In Handel’s day, beautiful singing was given precedence.  The dramatic action often occurred off-stage and was summed up in recitatives.  The singer would then express his or her reaction and then walk off the stage, whereupon another performer, or combination of performers, would do the same.  Not very dramatic. In addition, the A B A form of the arias which entails an elaborate da capo repeat of the first section, makes for great singing--at the expense of dramatic action.  In this example, which runs only a few minutes, the dramatic flow from beginning to end is uninterrupted by florid singing.  The result is superb. One can only imagine what Handel could have composed if he had lived in a time when operatic conventions had changed.  Verdi would have quite possibly have met his match.  Don’t get me wrong, what Handel composed is beautiful and effective in its own right, although modern audiences may need some time to adjust to the conventions of Baroque opera. 

The text, adapted from an earlier work by Handel’s friend, Nicola Francesco Haym, is very effective, a good poem in itself.  The original Italian version follows, along with my translation:

Alma del gran Pompeo,

Che al cenere suo d’intorno

Invisibil t’aggiri,

Fur’ombre i tuoi tronfei,

Ombra la tua grandezza, e un’ombra sei.

Così termina al fine il fasto umano.

Ieri che vivò occupò un mondo in guerra,

Oggi resolto in polve un’urna serra.

Tal di ciascuno, ai lasso!

Il principio è di terra, e il fine è un sasso.

Misera vita ! Oh, quanto è fral tuo stato !

Ti forma un soffio, e ti distrugge un fiato.

My prose translation :

Soul of great Pompey, who are invisibly

Encircling his ashes, your triumphs were shadows,

Your grandeur a shadow, and now you are

A shadow (shade) as well.

This is how human pomp ends--

Yesterday who, while alive, kept a world

At war, today is reduced to ash which an urn encloses.

Thus everyone’s beginning

Is of earth, and the end, alas! is a stone.

Miserable life!  Oh how frail is your state—

A breath forms you and a breath takes you away.

Handel was very much up to the task of putting these heartrending words to music—to truly unforgettable music. I know of no other excerpt in the entire history of opera in which the vanity and frailty of human existence, suddenly reduced to ash by death, is expressed more poignantly than it is here.

I provide two performances.  Although the original tessitura of the music for the title role was in the alto range, I think the gravitas of the text is best interpreted by a bass.  I will never forget Normal Treigle’s performance; his appearance in the opera alongside Beverly Sills was a great success—which occurred a few years before I, Claudius first appeared on TV.  Treigle had a great voice and possessed consummate acting skills as well; he delivered a very nuanced interpretation of this scene.  If his version were on YouTube, I would have selected it.  The bass Boris Christoff, however, gives a very admirable performance here.  I also include a version sung by the countertenor, Alfred Deller, which gives one a better idea of the original tessitura. The quality and purity of tone of Deller’s voice is amazing.  One gets the impression, however, that he was much more interested in beautiful sound rather than in dramatic phrasing,  a disadvantage in the performance of this piece of music, which demands both.

Conclusion

These two examples of great music with a Roman flair are unforgettable.  We can be grateful that Roman history–albeit an admittedly bowdlerized version thereof—inspired the librettists and, especially, the composers to create these masterpieces.  Hic cantat Roma in aeternam!  I hope this little article has inspired you, figuratively at least, to sing along.

The Three Colors Of Privilege

The United States suffers from three colors of privilege.  Each privilege is an independent variable; alone or in combination, as we shall see, they are harmful to the well-being of Americans and to the well-being of everyone else as well.  The three entities are white privilege, green privilege and red privilege.  We shall discuss each one in turn, followed by some closing remarks.

White Privilege

I do not watch Fox News, but do occasionally listen to a YouTube excerpt when the subject of the snippet catches my eye.  I couldn't resist clicking on one that contained a discussion Bill O'Reilly had about racism, white privilege in the broadest sense. When he angrily told his opponent that racism in America no longer exists, my jaw dropped, figuratively and literally.  How could anyone say something so patently absurd?

Racism, which took the most heinous form possible for well over a century, namely, slavery, has been a national disgrace.  True, great progress has been made.  The weeds of prejudice have extensive roots, however; dig up a a few inches of American soil just about anywhere and you will find them, still choking the growth of fairer perennials.

Yes, racism, unfortunately, is still very much with us.  Do I have to give examples?  Here's one: identical resumes were sent out to businesses, some with a black-sounding name, say, Jamal, and others with a more generic one, such as James.  Guess what the striking pattern of responses was?

Anecdotes pile up.  I will relate one.  I, an old white man, go to my bank once or twice a week.  During past transactions, I had pleasant exchanges with a teller.  I considered her to be a very friendly, polite person.  One day a black acquaintance of mine went to the same teller.  He is a very decent, polite person, one of the kindest human beings I know.  His crime: being young, black, and male.  He told me that she treated him as if he were a thug.  He wasn't even angry; I suppose you get used to it.  You shouldn't.  Now I, too, look at that teller with suspicion.  The friendly exchanges are gone.

The statistics are, to put it mildly, alarming.  Blacks and whites use illegal drugs at about the same rate; black drug users tend to smoke crack, white drug users tend to snort or inject powdered heroin.  Two forms of the same drug, yet the possession of 28 grams of crack is the legal equivalent of the possession of 500 grams of heroin; each carries a mandatory five-year prison sentence.   This and other factors have resulted in the obscene fact that 60% of those who have been sentenced to life-time imprisonment without parole for non-violent crimes are black, a statistic way out of proportion to the percentage of blacks in the population.  Over 90% of those imprisoned for life for non-violent crimes in Louisiana are black! Do you think this might be an attempt to remove black males from the population?  If you don't think so, think again.

Darryl Pinckney, in an article, "Black Lives and the Police," (New York Review of Books, August 16, 2016), presented a convincing list of the effects of white privilege.  Prejudice against blacks has resulted in,  "racial profiling, stop and frisk, discriminatory sentencing practices, the disproportionately high black prison industry, the hallucinatory disaster of the war on drugs, and the double standard when it comes to race and class and law."

We have a very serious problem in this country, and we all need to work together to fix it.



Green Privilege

Green privilege is class privilege.  It is the widespread belief that talent, achievement and wealth are proofs of superiority.  Green privilege tends to divide humanity into winners and losers. (This was the credo of Donald Trump before he suppressed this belief in order to gain working class support for his obnoxious candidacy.)

I would like to ask every successful person to answer these questions: Did you create your intelligence?  Did you create your talent?  Did luck, family circumstances and connections have anything to do with your success?  If you had a less talented brother, would you still consider him your brother? Aren't we all brothers and sisters?

I am convinced that no one has the right to consider himself/herself superior--or inferior--to anyone else.  If you are rich and successful that's great--but don't you think a little "there but for the grace of God go I" is in order?  Have you made the world even a little better with your efforts?

In countries like India and Great Britain, social position depends on birth as well as on possessions.  In America, if you're rich, that's royalty enough.

Dividing humanity into winners and losers has resulted in the dehumanization of the working class.  They are viewed by management more or less as things, cogs in a wheel.   Management strives to pay workers the least amount they can get away with.  Corporate profits soar; working class wages remain stagnant.  It is a national disgrace that the wealthy--and Congress is dominated by green privilege--refuse to raise the minimum wage, which hasn't kept up with inflation for years, even though the monetary gains of elites have outpaced it by many percentage points.

Green privilege differs from white privilege in at least one important aspect.  All racism is bad, but not all green privilege is bad.  That the talented and innovative are paid better might not be fair, but it is justifiable.  Without the incentive of wealth, many professionals wouldn't have worked so hard to achieve.  Many of their innovations have benefited all of us.  For instance, inventors, many of whom are a lot smarter and more talented than I am, have developed computers, the internet, word processing applications, etc, all of which have made my life more efficient and more enjoyable.  The talented deserve their higher wages.  Serious problems arise, however, when things get out of balance.

Green privilege is out of hand.  59% of the profits since 2008 have been appropriated by the wealthiest one percent. Another national disgrace!

It is not a question of redistribution, it is a question of justice.  Justice demands that anyone who is willing to work must receive a living wage.  More than that: everyone deserves health care, access to at least adequate schools, a safe environment, and decent housing.  (Housing that meets the minimum requirements of decency can be quite simple.)

Green privilege and white privilege are independent variables; when they combine, however, the effect is especially pernicious.  Have you noticed that nearly all black victims of police brutality come from the working class?  A black member of the elite, say a lawyer or a doctor, is sometimes harassed by the police on racial grounds, despite the former's fancy car, (white privilege), but such incidents occur more rarely than those involving working-class blacks, (green privilege).

Sometimes green privilege trumps white privilege.  Do you think O.J. Simpson would have been acquitted if he hadn't been rich and famous?  A sad, comic incident happened a few years ago when Henry Louis Gates Jr., the renowned Harvard professor, attempted to force open a jammed door of his residence.  Someone reported this as a potential burglary in progress.  A white police officer responded.  (Later, a commission determined that both parties were at fault, but that's not the point here.)  Gates, justifiably angered by being confronted by the police at his own door, suspected racism--and who can blame him?  But what he said was significant: "Do you know who you're messin' with?"  In effect he was telling the cop that he, the professor, a member of the elite, was somebody, while he, the police officer, a member of the working class, was nobody. (Gates is better than this, however; what is said in a fit of anger should not be used to judge a person.  On the other hand, the confrontation is a clear indication that green privilege is part of Gates's identity.)

The current waging of class warfare by the upper classes, whether done consciously or unconsciously,  continues to have a devastating effect--on us all, but especially on the working-class and the poor. The evil of racism, bad as it is, is not the only major problem in America.  Unbalanced green privilege is a very serious threat to our democracy, all the more because it is insidious and insufficiently acknowledged.



Red Privilege

Red privilege, which has wide support in America, has caused millions of deaths.  Red privilege is the belief that America is the best country in the world and has the right to impose its will on every nation.  Both political parties are guilty of red privilege.  Michelle Obama, for instance, in her effective Democratic Convention speech, correctly stated that America does not need to be made great again, as Trump asserts; it is already a great nation.  Granted; she should have stopped there, however.  She went on to assert that America is the "greatest country in the world".  In military power yes, but its lack of universal health insurance, its widespread  poverty and inequality, etc. make the claim somewhat dubious.  Later on that same night, Vice President Joe Biden, in a very stentorian voice, claimed that "America owns the finish line," implying that if the world as a whole hasn't yet acknowledged American supremacy, they had better.

The Republicans, as one might expect, are far worse.  They denounce President Obama for "leading from behind," which, I assume, means  trying diplomacy and coalition-building before resorting to force.  The Republicans demand an increase in military spending, even though the United States spends more on its military than all the major military powers combined.  The Republican view, shared by many, is that America is an island of good in a sea of evil; the sea needs to be patrolled and the sharks need to be eliminated.  

The belief in American exceptionalism has not had a benign effect on our neighbors.  (A Mexican adage is as follows: "Pity Mexico--So far from God and so close to the United States!)  A belief in manifest destiny, that is, that a continent dominated by European immigrants was God's will, turned the immorality of ethnically cleansing Indians from the best land into a supposed virtue, another example of God's chosen people displacing godless Canaanites.  

The list of American interventionism is long.  The Philippines and the brutal war that followed; blatant intervention in South American and Central American politics that often entailed the propping up of brutal dictators; the disastrous and unnecessary war in Vietnam during which thousands upon thousand died--this, unfortunately is only a partial list.

In recent times, red privilege resulted in one of the greatest blunders of American policy ever: the invasion of Iraq.  Remember what Cheney and Bush said?  In a few months, the Iraqis would be waving American flags, as American troops, their liberators, passed by.  Not exactly how things have turned out.

The tenets of red privilege, namely, that the rest of the world consists of cultural inferiors that need to be Americanized, often by military force, is still very much with us.

America is the foremost military power on earth.  In the modern world, the benefits of military force, are, however, moot.  Did the bombings of Vietnamese  and Iraqi cities turn them into Hollywood imitations of Normal, Illinois?  Have those two disastrous interventions made America safer?  Have trillions of dollars been spent for nothing?

The evil Nazi regime was, in a way, a gift to America.  Its defeat assured that America became the greatest power on earth.  

Since the fifties, however, the Chinese and Indians, among inhabitants of other nations, have decided that they deserve the benefits of modernity as well.  They are not willing to be footnotes to American history. This trend will not be reversed, no matter how much is spent on America's military.

Red privilege is thus a variant of white and green privilege.  America is the richest nation.  America is the best nation.  America must rule. 

The belief in American supremacy is as pleasing to the world as is the belief of white supremacy is to minorities.  

Red privilege cannot last.  International cooperation, however, can.  No, I am not naive--America needs to be able to defend itself--the world is seething with resentment and willingness to act out grievances with force and with acts of terror. 

Americans have every right to be proud of their country and its glorious Constitution.  The line between just pride and unjust arrogance is, however, often a thin one. Red privilege, another word for American hubris, tends to encourage politicians to opt for folly over pragmatism.  Just what is not needed!



Conclusion

We have discussed three cultural variables that can act independently and in combination to produce mild to severe negative influences on American life and on the well-being of the rest of the world's population as well.  The harm white privilege does to minorities is much in the news; the harms done by the other two privileges are much less widely acknowledged.  The purpose of this article is not to dilute the problem of racism; my intent is to bring to the readers' attention two additional problems, so that, with effort and non-violent struggle, all three false privileges can be turned into the one true privilege we all share, Americans and non-Americans alike, our common humanity.

The Wisdom of Virgil: A Buddhist, Hindu, and Western Interpretation of Three Lines from the Aeneid

The most famous quote from the Roman poet, Publius Virgilius Maro, (70 B.C.E.--19 B.C.E.), better known as Virgil, is not the opening lines of the Aeneid, which many of us learned in school: "Arma virumque cano, Troiae qui primus ab oris/ Italiam, fato profugus Laviniaque venit/litora..." "I sing of the arms and the man, who first from the shores of Troy/ came to the Lavinian shores and to Italy." (My God, how beautiful Latin is!  The exquisite combination of vowels and consonants would be impressive enough.  The real greatness comes from the fact that Latin is a highly inflected language.  This loosens the far stricter word order of most modern languages, freeing up Latin poets and orators to come up with, to quote Gershwin, "fascinating rhythms."  For example, if you can read Catullus in the original--I confess I need a simultaneous translation--you, dear reader, are damn lucky).

The subject of this essay, however, is not Latin prosody, but an analysis of the most frequently quoted lines from the Aeneid. The quote is from Book l of the classic, lines 461-463:

Sunt hic etiam sua premia laudi,

sunt lacrimae rerum et mentem mortalia tangunt,

solve metus, feret haec aliquam tibi fama salutem.

Translation

I would like to make two points at the outset.  First, we will be concerned about meaning here; our translation will be a prose one, with no attempt to approach in English  what is beautiful, elegant and poetic in Latin. Second, I mentioned the extraordinary musicality that an inflected language like Latin is able to provide.  There is a downside: the meanings conveyed by the words, especially in Latin poetry, can be very ambiguous.  This is further complicated by the fact that one word can have many meanings in Latin, as in most classical languages.  It is much easier, for instance, to be precise and specific in English. The result, due to the poetic compaction of Virgil's lines, is that any translation must be an interpretation.Third, if I understand the theory of deconstruction correctly, it is more important that interpretations be consistent with the text, rather than being an exact reflection of what the author consciously intended.  This is especially true with poetry; the best poems are new worlds that have an almost independent existence from their creators.

One more point before we proceed to the translation.  Latin scholars have debated whether the text in question should be interpreted in context, or whether Virgil was aiming at a general truth.  In other words, was Virgil referring to Aeneas's sojourn in Carthage, or was he referring to the journey through life of every human being?  Since this article discusses how the text increases our understanding of the human condition, my translation will be one of universal applicability.

It is time now to proceed with an English-language version of the famous quote.

First Line

Sunt hic etiam sua premia laudi

“Hic” means "here;" in this context, we take it to mean, “here, in life,"  or "here, on earth.” “Laudi” is the dative form of “laus” meaning praise or glory.  In this context, it refers to what is praiseworthy, especially praiseworthy behavior.  Nobility manifests itself in thought and in action.  I, therefore, choose to translate that which is praiseworthy as “wisdom.”  The translation of this line, therefore, reads as follows;

Here, therefore, wisdom has its rewards

Second Line

Sunt lacrimae rerum et mentem mortalia tangunt,

There are so many English versions of the wonderful phrase, “sunt lacrimae rerum” which literally  means "tears of things."  My favorite translation is by the Irish poet, Seamus Heany, which reads, “There are tears at the heart of things.”  The next phrase could be translated as “mortal things touch the mind,” but that does little justice to the Latin.  “Mentem” is the accusative form of “mens” as in the familiar “mens sana in corpere sano,” “a sound mind in a sound body," a justly famous Roman ideal. “Mind” doesn’t sound right to me, since it seems to leave out the emotional component, which, in certain contexts, the Latin word has.  “Mortal things” is clumsy—what Virgil is indicating is, of course, the little deaths in life everyone suffers which ends with the inevitable big one.  The issue is, of course, impermanence, or as Frost put it, “Nothing gold can stay.”  The translation of the second line, therefore, reads as follows:

There are tears at the heart of things, and the impermanence of life affects us deeply

Third Line

Solve metus, ferret haec aliquam fama tibi salutem.

I must incidentally remark that the exquisite rhythm makes this line very beautiful indeed.

“Solve” is the imperative form of “solvere” to loosen or to untie.  (An English-languae cognate is the word, “dissolve.”)  “Metus” can refer both to fear as well as to anxiety.  “Feret” is the third-person singular form of the verb, “ferre,” “to make” “Fama” certainly can mean “fame,” but the emphasis here is the achievement and not on a resultant increase in reputation.  “Salutem” is the accusative form of “salus” meaning “well-being” or “safety”.  For those of you who are familiar with Church Latin, you know that in a Catholic context “salus” refers to “salvation,” as in the following line from the Credo section of the mass: “Et propter nos homines et propter nostram salutem descendit de caelis.”  “And for us human beings and for our salvation, He descended from Heaven.”  In the context of the line we are translating, all three meanings of the word, namely, well-being, safety, and salvation, apply.  Thus we translate the third line as follows;

If you reduce fear, the resultant attainment will provide you with some degree of increased safety along with some improvement in your sense of well-being.  We can reduce the last thirteen words of the sentence with one, namely, “refuge.”

Our prose version of the lines of verse, consistent with the meaning of the words, is as follows:

In life, wisdom has its rewards.  There are tears at the heart of things and the impermanence of life affects us deeply; if you reduce fear, however, the resultant attainment will provide you with some refuge.

A Buddhist Interpretation

It leaps from the page!  The Irish poet’s translation of “lacrimae rerurm,” “tears at the heart of things,” is a just about perfect translation of the Buddhist term, “dukkha,” which is central to Buddhist teaching.  “Dukkha” has often been translated as “suffering,” but dukkha means much more than that.  It is an indication that things ultimately do not satisfy. We are not going to get what we desire, that is, peace and happiness, from possessions.  The satisfaction that allegedly comes from having more than the next person and by having more clout than the next person because one has accumulated more—this satisfaction does not last.  While it does, which can admittedly be a very long time, one is in real danger of losing one’s soul.  The meaning of dukkha is a clarion call to turn from the material to the spiritual.  Why?  Because there are tears at the very heart of things!

Things do not last, they are “mortalia,” they are impermanent.  In the legend of the Buddha, Asita, a sage, prophesied at Buddha’s birth that the infant would either become a great sage or a great king.  It is not surprising that his father, Suddhodana, a king himself, favored the latter possibility over the former one.  He tried to shield his son from “the tears at the heart of things.”  Buddha grew up in what could be called a palace of pleasure.  However, when, as a young man, he came into direct contact with “mortalia”—in the form of a sick man, an old man and a corpse—he was shaken to the core.  As in the quote from Virgil, the impermanence of human life affected him deeply. 

There are three essential truths of phenomenal life in Buddism.  The first, dukkha, we have already discussed.  The second, anicca, impermanence, is emphasized in the second line of the Latin quote as well.  What about the third truth, anatta? 

Anatta means that there is no such thing as an independent, abiding self; we are our thoughts, and there is no “soul” or self that contains them.  What we believe to be our personal self changes constantly; it is by its very nature insubstantial.

This third truth of Buddhism is not directly stated in Virgil’s quote, but it is certainly implied.  What causes the attainment which provides us with refuge? We reduce fear, obviously, by detachment from “lacrimae rerum” and by a resulatant transcending of “mortalia.”  The central tenet of Buddhism is the so-called Four Noble Truths.  The first we have already encountered, dukka.  The second, samudaya , states that the origination of dukkha lies in tanha, which can be translated as thirst, clinging, or desire. Desire for what?  Things; the fool’s errand of trying to get ultimate satisfaction from “mortalia.” The third truth states that dukkha can be overcome.  The fourth noble truth is the Eightfold Path, which outlines the practice needed to transcend clinging and to leave dukkha behind forever.

It is amazing.  Here we have the very essence of Buddhism in the lines of a Western classical author who had never heard anything about Buddhism.  This is a good indication that Buddhism is a revelation from the inside, and not a revelation dictated by an external guide.  Wisdom is wisdom, and  this wisdom was accessible in antiquity as Virgil’s quote so aptly demonstrates. (Wisdom, despite what newspapers might lead us to believe, is accessible to us moderns as well.) Was Virgil a crypto-Buddhist?  As far as we are wise, aren’t we all?

A Hindu Interpretation

Hinduism has many mansions.  Some are, admittedly, huts that don’t do a great job from protecting an educated person from the elements. It does, however, have one of the greatest spiritual palaces ever constructed, that is, intuited.  This splendid dwelling is called advaita Hinduism. (Literally “not two” or "non-dual").  Advaita asserts that absolutely everything is connected to everything else, and advises one to transfer allegiance from the self to the Self.  It emphasizes, as do some modern physicists, that consciousness is primary.    According to advaita Hinduism, the three Western religions, Christianity, Islam, and Judaism, are dualistic—that is, God is imagined to be "up there," while we humans exist on a lower plane.  For advaitins, everything is a manifestation of consciousness.  This spiritual stance has nothing in common with polytheism—if one talks about gods, the advaitin knows that one is using figures of speech. 

The outstanding representative of advaita Hinduism in modern times is the sage, Ramana Maharshi, (1879-1959).  His attainment of wisdom was the exception that proves the rule: he had no guru or mentor.  Maharshi had a profound experience when the truth of “mortalia,” specifically the visceral knowledge of death overwhelmed him at the age of 16.  As a Chinese sage once urged: one should meditate before a mountain until only the mountain remains--Ramana Maharshi became a mountain, as it were, and was perfectly at peace for the rest of his life. 

Advaita Hinduism and Buddhism are quite similar, but there are differences, at least as far as Ramana Maharshi is concerned.  Buddha was driven into the forest in order to find a refuge from suffering.  Ramana, who had been a healthy, normal adolescent named Venkataramen Iyer, only became aware of the tears at the heart of things, the lacrimae rerum, until later.  His enlightenment was spontaneous.

Ramana developed an original approach as a guide on the path to wisdom and peace, “Self Enquiry.”  One should concentrate on finding the answer to the question, “Nan Yar?,” “Who am I?”  The answer is, according to the advaita branch of Hinduism, that the transcendent I is the source of everything.  Understanding this intellectually is not enough.  One should completely identify with it; one must become the mountain, not an idea of the mountain.  Ramana lived a life “absorbed into the divine,” as it were, an avatar of cosmic consciousness.  He remained generous, serene and fearless until the day he died, even despite the pain caused by the cancer which racked his body at the end of his life.

The Hindu interpretation fo the Virgil quote is quite similar to the Buddhist one.  In Ramana’s case, he was confronted, as was the Buddha, with “mortalia” and “impermanence” and experienced a way to get beyond it.

The applicability of Ramana’s teaching to “solve metus” that is, “reduce fear” is obvious.  By realizing the true nature of the individual ego, one is freed from its bonds.

A Western Interpretation

Virgil was a Westerner, and so am I.  That is why Virgil wrote reduce fear and not eliminate fear.   The result would be some refuge and not a complete refuge.

The goal of the Eastern religions is uncompromising: the purpose of life is becoming a Buddha, each human being is to  become a sage.  Buddhism enjoins giving up all desires except the desire for enlightenment.  In advaita Hinduism, abandoning identification with the phenomenal I and obtaining a complete identification with the transcendent I is what everyone should strive for.

Most of us are neither Buddhas nor Ramana Maharshis; we are not able to give up the world entirely--nor do we want to, our relationships to fellow human beings, nature, and art are essential to our way of life. 

We do, however, want to make spiritual progress, so we can both live in the world and transcend it at the same time.  Our goal is therefore to reduce ignorance, (fear is the result of ignorance), not eliminate it entirely.  We know we are not separate from the world, but we do indeed feel separate from the world, and our spirituality must accommodate that feeling.  We might be nothing more than matter, but, humanely speaking, we are convinced that we are much much more than, well, meat.

We therefore interpret Buddhism and Hinduism as extreme formulations of what can be done by all of us, namely, the reduction of vanity, and the decrease of ignorance.

The Eastern religions are therefore like the great commandment to love one’s neighbor as oneself.  We’re never going to love our neighbor as ourselves, but setting the bar in the clouds encourages us to stop looking in the mirror, and to look up and confront the world with love and understanding.  We Westerners, (and the majority of modern Easterners as well), though, are determined to keep our feet on the ground while looking at the sky.

Conclusion

It’s astounding that Virgil was able, at least in this interpretation which is consistent with the text, to express the wisdom of the ages in three lines of verse. It is an example of what Aldous Huxley called “The Perennial Philosophy.” You can find it in Shakespeare and in the bible, but it is not limited to these. 

If you seriously reflect about this quote of Virgil, you will more likely be able to find ecstasy in a leaf; in  an eyelash; in the smile of a loved one; in Bach, etc etc--because these--you and everything else--are not, (thank God?), merely your little self but, marvelously, miraculously, and naturally, your true Self, the universe.

After that, you return to work.

The American Taliban Part ll

This is a continuation of “The American Taliban, Part l.”  The first part is available online on my blog, (you can access it by googling the title and my name).  In Part ll, we will discuss a few topics which are doing great harm to our country and to the world from the inside.

As I made clear in Part 1, I am using the term “American Taliban” as a term referring to negative forces within the United States.  I am not trying to dehumanize in any way the people whose behaviors, in my opinion, threaten the well-being of the nation.  They are human beings, whose inner cores are no worse or better than mine.  I feel obliged—which is every citizen’s duty—to criticize what seems to me to be gross injustices and policies that are destructive to the country and to its citizens.  

The topics briefly discussed in this article are as follows: Gun Control; Climate Change; Inequality, and finally, the decline of civil discourse.  (The list is, of course, not a complete list of contemporary problems.)

1. Gun Control

Everyone knows that the statistics regarding death by firearms in the United States are beyond alarming, so I will only summarize here.  There were 33,636 deaths by firearms in the United States in 2015.  Consistently, over several years, over 2/3 of these deaths were caused by suicide, and 2015 was no exception.  Accidental deaths from firearms, largely due to access to unsecured weapons in the home by family members, especially children, totaled 505 in 2013.  The latter grim statistic is illustrated by the case of Tovanna Holton, 15, who, embarrassed by a photo of her placed onto social media without her permission, took a revolver from her mother’s purse and committed suicide.  

Gun deaths from 1968 through 2011 exceeded the number of deaths of Americans killed in battle for every war fought by the United Sates from 1776 to 2016 combined.  It is not simply a black/white or class issue.  True, black males are the victims of homicide to a much greater degree than whites.  It is also true, however, than whites die from suicide at a much higher rate than do blacks.  (These statistics to my knowledge, have never been corrected for class.)

What are we doing about this horrible American epidemic? ( It is indeed chiefly an American problem. Death by firearms occur at ten times the rate than they do in Germany, for instance.) 

What are we doing?  Nothing.

What if the Centers of Disease control, faced a rise of mosquito-borne illnesses, came up with a plan to increase the number of swamps.  Every American must exercise his/her unalienable right to keep a pool of stagnant water in every American yard.  This would hardly advance the career of a doctor who devised such a loony plan.  And yet Americans continue to elect representative swho not only refuse to pass any from of gun control, but imagine that the solution to mass shootings is arming the masses!  The way to prevent mass murder in an elementary school is to be sure that Miss Grundy packs heat in her desk drawer! Ridiculous!

70% of Americans want more gun control  You know who’s to blame here.  The National Rifle Association has bought off  many of our politicians.  A Republican who dared to do the right thing would most  likely not get reelected—The gun lobby would see to that.  And the primary goal of just about every politician is to stay in office.

The gun lobby and its supporters; all those who have transformed the Second Amendment into a fetish of fanaticism—these are among the members of the American Taliban, causing great harm to the United States.

Can something be done?  If the American Taliban is defeated via knowledge and via the polls, yes.  Australia provides a fine example of what legislation can achieve.   After a mass shooting in that country in 1996, Australia passed, with bipartisan cooperation, strict gun control measures.  There was a buyback program of weapons.  Private sales of firearms—all firearms—were banned.  All guns have to be registered to their owners.  One has to have a legitimate reason to own a firearm in the first place.  Firearms must always be kept secured.  The result has been a dramatic decrease in firearm deaths: a 74% reduction in suicides and a 69% reduction in homicides!!

From 2005-2015, there were 301, 797 deaths from firearms in the United States—and only 71 deaths from terrorism.  If America enacted similar gun control as in Australia, it is reasonable to assume that the number of deaths would decrease by a similar percentage. This means that firearms caused the unnecessary deaths of 211,000 Americans over that period!  Once again, home-grown demons have proved to be far more destructive than foreign ones.

2,  Climate Change

The great astrophysicist Stephen Hawking, when asked if he could explain the Trump phenomenon, replied, “I can’t.  He is a demagogue, who seems to appeal to the lowest common denominator.”  Agreed.  Hawking went on to say, “A more immediate danger is runaway climate change.  A rise in ocean temperature would melt the ice caps and cause a release of large amounts of carbon dioxide from the ocean floor.  Both effects could make our climate like that of Venus, with  (surface) temperature of 250 degrees.” (That’s in centigrade, by the way; the equivalent is 482 degrees Fahrenheit.)

The polar caps are melting.  More severe droughts; more severe storms. Mass extinctions. Miami's basements are already getting soggy.  Countries like Bangladesh are severely threatened, an indication of mass migrations to come.  Other countries, like Mauritius and the Maldives, will probably be wiped off the map.

What is the response of the American Taliban? An astounding 56% of Republican representatives deny that climate change exists!  Never mind that 98% of scientific papers on climate change acknowledge it as a serious problem.  Climate change denial is virtually unique to the United Sates.  Only in America could a powerful politician, James Inhofe, do something as stupid as to bring a snowball into the Senate as proof that climate change does not exist.  And he’s the chairman of the influential Senate Committee of Environment and Public Works!

President Obama is an ardent supporter of combating climate change, and has done much, but the problem remains very acute.  Political representatives of the American Taliban, paid off by the American sheikhs of the fossil fuel industry, do their best to contravene every environment-friendly effort.

Do not imagine that the Paris agreement of 2015 will work wonders,  Here’s what one official said of it, “There is no action, just promises.  As long as fossil fuels appear to be the cheapest out there, they will continue to be burned.”  The ocean is dying.  It will be too late if we wait till it's dead.

The American Taliban is significantly contributing to a situation, which, according to Stephen Hawking, can turn out to be the equivalent of an unstoppable meteor, the size of the one that obliterated the dinosaurs, 65 million years ago, hurtling towards Congress..  What terrorist group could hope to accomplish that?

3  3. Inequality 

The unexpected dramatic increase in the suicide rate among working-class whites is a good indication of the devastation that inequality is causing for everyone.  According to The Wall Street Journal, 95 % of the gains after the Great Recession of 2008 has gone exclusively to the top 1%,  The top 10% are receiving 50% of the salaries of all workers.  The Great Recession, which has made inequality much, much worse is a man-made phenomenon.  It was caused by the greed and criminal activity of Wall Street, the very center of American Taliban activity.  (An example of their criminal activity: Wall Streeters continued to sell securities that they knew were worthless, pretending that they were low-risk  investments.  After selling them, they sold the stock short.)  As a result of Wall Street concupiscence, trillions of dollars of savings were lost; millions and millions of jobs were lost; millions and millions of people lost their homes. 

Do you recall the murder of Eric Garner, who was strangled to death by cops on the streets of New York?  (His crime: selling untaxed cigarettes.)  In contrast, not only did Wall Street executives, who caused a much greater degree of economic destruction, escape prosecution, they received billions of dollars in bonuses—for wrecking the economy!  The result: Walt Street is doing just fine while the working class continues to decline.

Stephen Hawking was flummoxed by the Trump phenomenon, but I will venture to provide a partial cause. Inequality! Demagoguery feeds on it.  If members of the working-class were receiving a living wage, they would tend to live and let live The Trump phenomenon is certainly related to the discontent and plight of the white working-class.  Globalization and the greed of the rich have been destroying their way of life. (I must add that during the halcyon days of the white working class, the years after World War ll, few cared about  the vehement racism that denied prosperity and equality for the nation’s black citizens.)

The American Taliban is tearing apart the fabric of our society—a goal that foreign terrorists aim to achieve, yet, in comparison to the American Taliban, the former have failed miserably. No terrorist group in the world has been anywhere near as effective as the American Taliban in wounding the United States.

4. Lack of Civil Discourse

I will provide two examples of the widespread vicious hatred evinced by some members of the American Taliban.    

 Praying for the death of the President of the United States
   

Praying for the death of the President of the United States—where would you expect that to occur?   Baghdad?  Tehran?  How about Georgia?  Recently a Georgia senator quoted a verse from Psalm 109 which states, “May his days be few; let another take his office.”  The psalm continues, "May his children be fatherless and his wife a widow."  Some may mean this as a joke; in this violently polarized country, I have no doubt, however, that many would be delightted at our president's death.  This is shameful.

I think Jonathan Linkins of The Huffington Post got it right when he wrote, referring to the Psalm 109 desecration: "This was the latest thing in 'Debasing The Institution You Pretend To Hold Dear In Order To Suggest That President Obama Should Be Murdered Without Actually Coming Right Out And Saying So"'

Many people exhibit this blasphemous usage of the psalm on their licence plates. That the Georgia senator, and others, notably the Speaker of the House in Kansas, continue to quote the psalm in reference to our president is a national disgrace.

I was well aware of the disastrous policies of George W. Bush—I can't imagine, however, praying for his death. It is just one example of the terrible partisan divide in this country. 

Know Your Parasites

I found this on social media:

This isn’t funny.  This is sick.  It especially disgusts me, since I have studied twentieth century history.  I just read a memoir written by the granddaughter of a notorious Nazi commander of a concentration camp.  He referred to Jews as lice.  He referred to Jews as vermin.  Many of the Nazis directly involved with the Holocaust referred to Jews in this way. 

Who, besides members of the American Taliban, would use such derogatory language when referring to the President of the United Sates and to a candidate for the presidency?

Conclusion

Under serious threats from abroad, we continue to hollow ourselves out from within.  We’re all responsible, whether as active members or as passive members of the American Taliban.  Not doing anything good io diminish its influences is doing something bad.  We must become aware of the threat to our country posed by the American Taliban, and dedicate ourselves to an extensive non-violent reform of the United States.  Now.

Some of the most dangerous men in the world wear suits.

The Death of a Model Citizen

When I saw the photo of Philandro Castile, slain on July 6, 2016  by a  police officer after a traffic stop due to broken tail light (!!!) I grieved and said, "This could have been my son!"

When I saw this photo of Patrick Zamampa, one of the five policemen slain during an (up-to-then) peaceful demonstration in Dallas to protest Philandro's senseless killing, I grieved and said, "This could have been my son!"

When I saw the photo of Micah Johnson, the man who, along with some others, murdered five police officers and wounded several others, I grieved, for he, too, could have been my son.

You see, I have a large family, you and I, animals, insects, Earth, stars and galaxies are in it as well.

I want to stop grieving. My relatives are killing each other!  It has got to stop.  I have a solution.  I know what has to be done--and, regarding race if not class,  it is being done, but far too slowly.

First a few words about the conditions that made the death of Philandro Castile an all-too-common event.  The officer who shot him did not set out to kill a black man.  If you had asked the officer if black lives matter, he might even have agreed.  I believe what poisoned the encounter from the outset was, you guessed it, racism.  His car is probably full of drugs.  If I don't watch out, he will shoot me.  He's violent.  He's black.  Some variation of this most likely went through the officer's mind.  Never mind that nothing in Mr. Castile's demeanor indicated a penchant for violence.  Never mind that Mr. Castile apparently complied with the officer's demands like a model citizen.

The result: the model citizen is dead.  (Reports indicate that Mr. Castile lived up to his name: Phil, Greek for love.  Andro, Italian (once the accent is placed over the "o") means I shall go.  Philandro--"I love wherever I go."  He will never be a role model for kids again.  Why?

The best actions of human beings reflect, whether consciously or not, the commandment that we should love our neighbor as ourselves.  Not only the neighbor who looks like you.  Not only the neighbor who is of the same social class as you.  Whether smarter or simpler; richer or poorer; black or white--your neighbor is your neighbor.  No exceptions.

This brings me to the solution--it won't be easy to realize, but I see no other way.  We must integrate our neighborhoods.  Both class-wise and race-wise!  If the officer who killed Philandro had had a African-American neighbor who lived a life as exemplary as Philandro did, he most likely would not have been able to make the assumptions that he did. Mr. Castile, Mr. Zamampa, and Mr. Johnson would all be alive! (With the help of people like Mr. Castile, and Mr. Zamampa--and all of us-- there is a good chance that Mr. Johnson could have been helped to walk in the right direction.  Even if that goal proved elusive, we must judge behavior and not the person.!)

Location, location, location.  Dear neighbor, do you want your location to be a grave?  The commandment is not that you must have a big house.  If you believe that your house is worth more than your humanity, you have no idea who you really are.

I know who I am.  Philandro Castile.  Patrick Zamampa.  The police officers.  All the black lives shattered.  I know who I am. You.

The American Taliban Part 1: Ignorance

“The American Taliban” is a term coined after the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan to denote fundamentalist bigots in the United States. In this essay, the definition of that term is expanded to indicate "the enemy within" in the broadest sense, namely those forces which are making Americans poorer, less educated, and less safe.  You don't have to a religious fanatic to be a member of the American Taliban as defined here; putting self-aggrandizement before general prosperity, whether done consciously or unconsciously, is, however, mandatory for membership. The author is against demonizing those who wield economic and political power to the detriment of the American people as a whole; what is important is to realize what is going on, in order to put an end to present dangers before it is too late.  There is no doubt, in the author’s opinion at least, that in many respects, internal threats to the common good are even more serious than external ones.

We will briefly discuss four of these threats, namely, the lack of gun control; the inadequate response to climate change; the problem of inequality, and the decline of civil discourse.  This list is, unfortunately, not exhaustive; nevertheless, it gives a good indication of the major problems our country is facing.

Most man-made, that is, unnatural disasters, are caused by a combination of selfishness and ignorance; our national problems are the result of these personal flaws writ large.  Before turning to the wounds that continue to fester due to the narcissism of those in power, we will first briefly discuss the deleterious effect of widespread ignorance, which enables those who rule to continue to misrule.  Ignorance is the Fifth Column, the chief ally of the enemy within, weakening our nation by undermining the other columns that have held us up well—until now.

1. Ignorance

In medicine, there is a measure of general health called the Infant Mortality Rate, (IMR), which measures the mortality rate of newborns per thousand live births.  The correct assumption justifying that this measure provides a good assessment of health in general is that if a pregnant woman receives adequate prenatal care in a given community,  the medical care for everyone in that community must be adequate as well.  (When I started to practice pediatrics in the early 1970s, the IMR was quite high; it has now come down to 5.87 (2015), indicating vast improvements in public heath.  The U.S. rate, however, is higher, in many cases much higher, than  those of all other countries of the West, demonstrating that adequate health care for all in our country remains a distant goal.)

Using the IMR as a model, I propose a new rate, the ABCDE, to keep track of the level of ignorance in a country.  I define ABCDE  (Adult Believers in Creationism and Deniers of Evolution) as the percent of a population that asserts, among other absurdities, that Adam and Eve were historical figures, and that “evolution is just a theory,” etc. According to the latest Gallup poll on this subject, an astounding 42% of Americans believe God created humans in their present form by fiat; an additional 31% believe in God-directed evolution.  Neither of these beliefs is scientific; since our rate is concerned with those who deny evolution, however, we will use 42 as the current percentage of ABCDE.  Just as the IMF is associated with general public health, the ABCDE percentage is a good indication of general ignorance. I make what I think is a justified assumption that the more educated one is, the less likely it is that that person denies evolution—in fact, 98% of scientists are convinced that Darwin was right.  In contrast to the United States, about 80% of the population in countries such as Iceland, Sweden, Denmark and France accept evolution.  Only Turkey, among the dozens of nations polled, denied evolution to a greater degree than Americans do.  (Things are getting better, however; most Americans under 30 think complex organisms arose from simpler ones.) 

I do not assert that the ABDCE percentage is an exact gauge of the amount of ignorance present in a given country; I do assert, however, that it is a general indication thereof.

The contrast between the ABCDE percentage in the United States and that of other Western countries is a clear indication that ignorance in the United States is a serious problem.  Another general truth: when ignorance is rampant, democracy is in trouble.

Recently a television journalist inquired of passers-by if they could identify what the term “Mt. Rushmore” referred to.  Few could.  Many didn’t know what year America gained independence, or from which country independence was gained.  38% of Americans are unable to pass a general civics test—Sample question: which countries did the United States fight against in World War ll?  A large percentage couldn’t identify the century in which the Civil War was fought.  Astounding.

Ignorance and the lack of critical thinking go hand in hand. The ability to analyze is essential in a democracy; without it, one votes according to one’s gut reactions, which are very often in direct contrast to one’s true economic and political interests, not to mention those of the nation as a whole.

The United States does not have, to put it mildly, an informed electorate. When an angry, disaffected public considers comfortable fictions as facts, and uncomfortable facts as fictions, the chances that a demagogue might become president rises significantly.  (If you haven’t been living in a bubble, you know what I'm referring to here.)  

Those responsible for the decline in the economic and political conditions of the American population as a whole, that is, members of the American Taliban, pose the most serious current threat to the welfare of our nation.  We are suffering from serious wounds that are largely self-inflicted. 

2.  

That ignorance is the root cause of a great deal of evil in the world was beautifully expressed by Charles Dickens in A Christmas Carol.  In the part of the story quoted here, Scrooge notices that there is something hidden by the thick folds of the Spirit's festive garment. The huge Ghost of Christmas Present thereupon opens his robe and exposes two urchins crouched at his feet. (The following still is from the 1951 classic film, A Christmas Carol, starring Alistair Sim as Scrooge.)

                            

“Forgive me if I am not justified in what I ask,” said Scrooge, looking intently at the Spirit’s robe, “but I see something strange, and not belonging to yourself, protruding from your skirts  Is it a foot or a claw?”

“It might be a claw, for the flesh there is upon it,” was the Spirit’s sorrowful reply.  “Look here.”

From the folding of its robe, it brought two children; wretched, abject, frightful, hideous,miserable.  They knelt down at its feet, and clung upon the outside of its garment.

“Oh, Man, look here.  Look, look, down here,” exclaimed the Ghost.

They were a boy and a girl.  Yellow, meager, ragged, scowling, wolfish; but prostrate, too, in their humility.  Where graceful youth should have filled their features out, and touched them with its freshest tints, a stale and shriveled hand, like that of age, had pinched, and twisted them, and pulled them into shreds.  Where angels might have sat enthroned, devils lurked, and glared out menacing.  No change, no degradation, no perversion of humanity, in any grade, through all the mysteries of wonderful creation, has monsters half so horrible and dread.

Scrooge started back, appalled.  Having them shown to him in this way, he tried to say they were fine children, but the words choked themselves, rather than be parties to a lie of such enormous magnitude.

“Spirit, are they yours?” Scrooge could say no more.

“They are Man’s,” said the Spirit, looking down upon them.  “And they cling to me, appealing from their fathers. This boy is Ignorance.  This girl is Want.  Beware them both, and all of their degree, but most of all beware this boy, for on his brow I see that written which is Doom, unless the writing be erased.  Deny it,” cried the Spirit, stretching out its hand towards the city.“Slander those who tell it ye.  Admit it for your factious purposes, and make it worse.  And abide therein.”

“Have they no refuge or resource?” cried Scrooge.

“Are there no prisons?” said the Spirit, turning on him for the last time with his own words. “Are there no workhouses?”

                                         

       --A Christmas Carol, Stave 3: The Second of the Three Spirits

Yes, Spirit, we have many overcrowded prisons.  Yes, Spirit, we have many workhouses where people toil for a non-living wage.  No, Spirit, we are not doomed yet, but Yes, Spirit, we are in very serious trouble. “Whose fault is that?”

 "Slander those who tell it ye.  Admit it for your factious purposes, and make it worse.  And abide therein."  One could imagine the Spirit using these very same words while addressing a joint session of the United States Congress.

But most of all beware that boy, America, beware  that boy.

                                          *

In Part ll we will discuss three areas where the effect of the forces of the American Taliban has been most pernicious.