Only

Yesterday I attended an anti-Reclaim Australia rally. Reclaim Australia are the local group of xenophobes that are currently attacking refugees and the religion of Islam. Reclaim Australia are (generally) a bunch of hateful people that will attach themselves to the most recent ideas in the news to spread their philosophy of hate, mistrust and “othering” all who are not like them. Little Daleks in human bodies … I think you get the picture.

These people need to be shown that they are wrong and that spreading hate is a nasty and venomous thing to do.

I stood with the people opposing them - I still do from a philosophical standpoint.

We stood and chanted. Firstly words we all agreed with. Then words I agreed with less and less. I just skipped the chanting of the sections I did not agree with and found myself soon silent, not to mention the idea of my usual spiritual practice involving chanting - and watched as it was morphed into something nastier.

The opposition moved to where the Daleks stood. There were many police standing between and on horses, separating the two groups. I could not see anyone to oppose. But just angry people shouting at the unseen threat and calm police.

The police cordon was tight - I asked some officers at the fringes if they knew any details of what was going on, the numbers on both sides, the mood, the intention - the admitted that they didn’t know. If I wanted to know what I was doing that morning, they advised that I watch that evening's news.

If I was there to make a difference, to effect change, to educate or even show a solid resistance - then I couldn’t. There was no place there for that.

I also found it fascinating that both sides had placards with swastikas, bombs and (occasionally) barbed fences on them - to help them express the unreasonableness of the other side.

I consider myself Buddhist and flirt with the ideas of Amitabha Buddha - who is often represented by a swastika. Both sides of this argument were using a symbol I cannot associate with without at least having to explain myself to represent their oppression. One side was openly fighting for a stop to Islamophobia and the other were fighting for “good Christian values”. They were using a symbol that I cannot use in my religious devotion, even though it came from there, as a slight between sides fighting over religious freedom.

The nearest temple for my version of Zen (Soto) - is not that widely known about and has a very small online presence - it is also a mere 700+ km away. If I went to Soto’s place of founding and head temple, I would be quite disadvantaged by not being able to speak fluent Japanese, and knowing some ancient Chinese would be valuable too. This is why it seems a bit rich for me to hear about religious intolerance from both the Pro and Anti Reclaim Australia people.

I felt disenchanted by this - and left.

In the heat of that moment, where emotions were running high and where in the past occasionally physical violence occurs I took a photograph and wrote something on my personal facebook page.

I didn’t share it with the organisers on either side intentionally - as it was me, personally, blowing off a little steam and questioning why it has to be like this.

Big mistake.

While no direct, actionable threats were made either publicly or privately, the air of animosity was great - but I refuse to be drawn into personal attacks in retaliation or attacks of myself and my character. That being said, at the time of this writing, the public ones are still public - I don’t want to delude myself about my actions or my past.

But I am not proud of all the defences I made - and I am sorry if I harmed anyone during this.

What I learnt was:

• Non-violence and non-engagement are some very powerful tools but are very difficult to wield effectively.
• Non-violence and non-engagement may often be mistaken for apathy or ignorance.
• Engaging with those that could learn to use non-violence and non-engagement - defeats the purpose.
• I should think more before I speak or type.
• The questioning of certain views, such as what your are doing and why, is not welcome everywhere.

I have dealt with bigger fires in my life, that have burnt and harmed me more than this did - I am glad I received some of this undercurrent of vitriol, as I could take it, but I now know some of what those that question the ideas of those around them can receive. I have seen what turns them into angry violent people while I was able to withstand it. I can start to understand how their frustrations can build and finally explode in acts that end up shocking entire nations and I personally choose against following those dark paths.

I also believe much more firmly that if I see someone who needs help, that I will try to help them - regardless of political belief, religion, class, caste, sex, gender, sexuality and whatever else I may have missed out in this short list.

When people share things they cannot choose how others react to it - by the same token, those that receive cannot question what is displayed.

Thoughts that can build a world or destroy it with as much ease

[Update: See note at end of post for more details.]

Attention, all! See the marvels of God! He plants flowers and trees all over the earth, bans war from pole to pole, breaks all the weapons across his knee.“Step out of the traffic! Take a long, loving look at me, your High God, above politics, above everything.”

- Psalms 46:8-10, the Message translation

Be still, and know that I am God: I will be exalted among the heathen, I will be exalted in the earth.

- Psalms 46:10, King James Version.

This bible verse gives me pause - and I know I will more likely than not take it out of context, sometimes words out of context tell you more than books with context because of the real secret to the world, we give these things context - "with our thoughts we make the world" it is claimed the Buddha said.

We may find a moving image somewhere be it from another culture or another place and time and have that speak to us as people, shape us in ourselves to only find the original text meaningless, does that make our life before a fiction and this is reality?
This is a complicated question well out of the scope of my intention right now - but let me say that I think that the stories we tell ourselves about ourselves shape our lives, they inform the way we see the world and the way we think - this changes the way we relate to other people, events, ideas and situations.

As a species I think we have an idea of what the "best" we can be as people that can exist - an idea of God, Jesus, Buddha, Allah, Krishna, et al. The idea of the optimal person, always able to think clearly yet able to be embodied as pure compassion - or something along those lines. We know we can backslide emotionally, psychologically, spiritually or physically on an individual scale so we can have a vague sense of one who doesn't - one who is "eternally lucky", every back step we made was a step forward to them - and they progressed just as we did when we could. I imagine all these ideas and dreams being projected as a form - like an image of a person being displayed by a projector. I tend to call this idea Amitofo/Amitabha - as that is the name of the Buddha of infinite light and infinite life, fitting I think; infinite light because it is a mass projection of each individual's light and infinite life because ideas of people and projected images cannot die.

[Quick aside: is there a being at the center of this projection being projected upon? I am not sure, if there was I believe they would not care too much, they just happen to be neverendingly lucky and the furthest progressed being they would presumably just deal with it as it was just another thing to deal with like most people have to "deal with" following the social contract. Whatever is there reflects most of what it receives, perhaps as a skillful mirror.]

The Psalms were originally songs to be sung, so their lyrical quality is intentional - and even after translation their ability to put a lot of thought in a small space makes them poetical.

So back to the bible - where would this idea be? I think calling it God would be a pretty safe statement, Jesus would then be an earthly manifestation of such a being - God made flesh to feel our pain and suffering first hand. Then what about Psalm 46:10? It was sung by those suffering, those in pain - it was sung by us, by all humanity. "Be still, and know that I am God" is you as a person thinking of something beyond you that transmits it's immense and intense light onto you - cleans you, purifies you and speaks through you to remind you we are all one. I am god as much as you are or anyone else - any other living being. We can all make these statements - we can all "other" ourselves to give us the self-acceptance we need and have been missing from time to time.

Is it sad we need to project our love in order for it to come back? To love in order to be loved. It doesn't really matter - if you need that form of a feeling you will find it, and you should use it if it's useful.

I mean with our thoughts we make the world ... right?

[Note: On further reflection, I am not sure this post is pleasant, useful or interesting - I was considering removing it but that in itself would help me feed my ego. How will anyone be able to see the real me, or how will I even be able to present that side of me to the world (or more importantly myself) if people are only used to seeing a cleaned up, stage managed and heavily curated version of me. After seeing that for so long seeing the real me may be a shock - and that is why I am here - to try to share that part of me.]