Archive for November, 2009

Be The Change

Wednesday, November 11th, 2009

bethechange Book review: Be The Change — How Meditation Can Transform You and the World, by Ed and Deb Shapiro

I tend to see the “Self-Help” and “New Age” sections of the book store to be redundant. Both appear to proffer a variety of methods by which readers may allegedly improve their lives, and the methodology is based either on mysticism or disguised pragmatism.

‘Be The Change’ is a book that I could see being found in either section, but something that seems to set it apart from most of its neighbors is that instead of focusing entirely on helping the reader, it has as a goal to improve the world in general. The premise is that meditation can change you and the world.

But what is meditation? Surprisingly, this book on meditation doesn’t come right out and tell the reader. This fact had two effects upon me. First was frustration. Why am I reading a book about meditation that doesn’t start off by telling me exactly what the authors think meditation is? Second was enlightenment. The authors are indirectly telling me that it’s not quite that easy to define meditation — the anecdotes told by the myriad contributors go a long way to show that although meditation is somewhat tangible as a concept, it’s still very subjective and personal. I wasn’t getting an easy answer, but instead of throwing the book down in frustration, I tried to analyze the collected thoughts of the authors and contributors.

Be The Change was written by Ed and Deb Shapiro, who, according to their website, have authored sixteen books on personal development, meditation and social action, and who have led meditation retreats and personal development programs worldwide for over 25 years.1 The book’s personal foreword was written by HH The Dalai Lama, and enhanced greatly by contributions from dozens of famous and influential people who have all had a variety of experiences with meditation. Although the book’s format is quite unlike reading an instruction manual, the personal contributions are interesting and thoughtful — the book could nearly rest on the contributions alone and still be a worthy read (note that there are certainly samples of religious contributors, but plenty of non-religious, spiritual, and overall peace-loving contributors to add balance).

The skeptic in me suggested that something so subjective and undefined as meditation couldn’t be as influential as advertised. The standard fare for self-help and new age seems to involve one of two fundamental components — magic or pragmatism. Authors often twist these into shapes that appear novel and exciting for readers who are on the lookout for the next great thing to help them along some personal path. But when those how-to books are examined, and the facade stripped away, all that’s left is either a skeletal message of “just do what makes sense and you’ll be fine,” or “this is about as reliable as coin-flipping, but at least you got to light some candles and chant some freaky words, right?”

With that as a basis for comparison, why should I think that meditation is any different than what boils down to mere “resting for recovery of the mind and body, a logical and pragmatic thing we all do in sleep anyway”? The book seems to challenge that notion, suggesting that meditation is not just a basic function hyped up for eager audiences, but, instead, it’s a source for clarity and personal insight that can have a positive effect on the world around us. One of contributor Ed Begley, Jr.’s comments expands on that notion:

Although we are not going to solve all the problems by just sitting on the side of a hill or by spinning a prayer wheel, we also have to be still and centered so we can act with clarity. In other words, in order to do this work, we need to have an inner resource we can always come back to. If we do not have quiet time, we will get too burnt out to be able to clean up the rivers or save the whales. We have to sit still and recharge. We have to be in the moment as it is happening, and we cannot do that if we do not have meditation as a resource.2

When my skepticism kicks in with a response like, “Well, that can’t possibly apply to everyone who is doing good in the world, for many of them get along just fine without meditation,” my guess is that meditation “apologists” would respond, “We’re not talking about meditation necessarily in the form of sitting down, cross-legged, humming or chanting for hours on end; meditation can take many forms, and fundamentally it’s about self-reflection, clarification, and contemplation.”

I, in turn, wonder whether, then, if meditation isn’t just another fundamental form of pragmatism, but one that transcends aspects of life so much that just about anything can be referred to as meditation. For example, a dancer who gets into a “zone” while dancing may not personally believe he or she is “meditating,” but ‘Be The Change’ suggests3 that dancing can be meditative.

The Shapiros nearly answer my question in their second chapter, So What Is Meditation?

Meditation has been associated with everything from affirming ourselves as thin/rich/in love to visualizing ourselves bathed in white light to sitting cross-legged with closed eyes and doing nothing but contemplating our own navel. Yet meditation is none of these. Rather, it covers a vast arena of experiences and activities, including opening our heart to all beings, realize the truth and becoming free, counting our breaths, gazing at the flame of a candle, intoning different sounds, or moving rhythmically…. In other words, it is both an experience and a practice — an experience of oneness, of being with who we really are, as well as the practice that enables us to be in this state.4

That statement is both revealing and misleading. I don’t think the authors are trying to say that sitting cross-legged while thinking self-affirming thoughts is “absolutely not meditation,” but instead that doing so doesn’t cover the gambit of meditation — it’s not the embodiment of meditation, since meditation includes so many different things, fundamentally being some sort of mental connective experience combined with whatever physical method is necessary to achieve that state.

Although I don’t agree with a number of the contributor quotes, there are so many different points of view that I found it to be more like reading different perspectives about life, so that even though I might not be able to perceive it in the same way, I can respect the thoughts of those who are experiencing it right along side me.

This isn’t really a comprehensive meditation ‘how to’ book. It provides a few basic techniques, plus insight into areas that I had not previously considered as fitting for “meditation,” such as while running, dancing, and writing. Despite the fact that by doing so, the book implies that meditation is anything and everything as long as you can pin the “meditation” label upon it, the concept of searching for a meditative state in an activity that is not stereotypically meditative is unique (for me) and has offered me something to try on my own.

So, can meditation change me and the world? Absolutely. If through meditation I am more clear, less distracted, focused, and can achieve some sort of greater connection to my inner self (where I believe most people have a common set of higher moral principles), then I, as a member of the world, have improved it, have changed it. If others do the same, we collectively improve and change it. Is ‘Be The Change’ the key component in accomplishing such a feat? No, but it’s certainly an interesting book that may help to guide those who know nothing about meditation or who are curious and want to learn more. Just be sure to approach the book with the knowledge that it is primarily anecdotal, with clarifying insights by two longtime practitioners, and not everything in it should be taken as objective fact. (For example, the book is full of statements like, “Meditation accomplishes X,” where a more factual and unbiased approach would be, “Meditation can accomplish X.”)

In any event, I think meditation is certainly worth a shot, and I plan to try some different methods and try to visualize meditation with different points of view based on my reading of the book. It’s already gotten me thinking about things I’d like to try, and considering my general skepticism, I think that says something about the quality of the book and the revelations of the authors and contributors.

  1. http://www.edanddebshapiro.com/about-us/ [<]
  2. p.197 [<]
  3. pp.321-323 [<]
  4. pp. 15-16 [<]

Through the Lens of Righteousness [StOP Comic 20]

Saturday, November 7th, 2009

Through the Lens of Righteousness

Also see What is Terrorism? by Mojoey

Worried About Virginia

Thursday, November 5th, 2009

If you thought my satire about a Virginia referendum to reject suffrage was too hyperbolic, check out what Rachel Maddow has to say about Virginia’s newly elected governor and attorney general:1

Excerpts: (starting at about 1:00)

Virginia… elected an attorney general named Ken Cuccinelli, who has called being gay “intrinsically wrong,” and has said that it does not comport with natural law….2

…Virginia’s new governor-elect Bob McDonnell just a few years ago said that certain homosexual conduct could and should disqualify a person from being a judge because of violating Virginia’s Crimes Against Nature law.3

  1. To clarify: I’m not calling what Maddow said as hyperbolic. I’m saying that my satire might not be as “out there” as it might seem at first glance, as there’s plenty of evidence that McDonnell and Cuccinelli are both noted regressionists. [<]
  2. See Shannon questions Cuccinelli’s stance on gay employees, Richmond Times Dispatch [<]
  3. See Sex Law Is No Judging Criteria, Daily Press [<]

Virginia Referendum to Reject Suffrage

Wednesday, November 4th, 2009

Bob_McDonnellVirginia Governor elect Bob McDonnell issued a statement today that once in office he would pursue a referendum in Virginia to reject the constitutional amendment that lets women vote.1

McDonnell was attacked for his 1989 thesis for Regent University, in which he described working women and feminists as ‘detrimental’ to the family. Despite his campaign promise that his views have matured, McDonnell is apparently using the gubernatorial platform and the trend of states passing similar initiatives regarding civil rights to manifest his idealism in a state that has a long history of conservatism.

When asked about the implications of the Tenth Amendment, McDonnell’s spokesperson indicated that “the Constitution as ratified explicitly excluded women,2 and even if state sovereignty in this matter does not trump federal law, it is firmly established that the federal government cannot force participation in the administration of any of its programs.3 In addition, the federal government is prohibited from trying to prevent the Commonwealth’s free exercise of religion, which is a substantive part of the referendum — to affirm religious freedom.”4

  1. No, he didn’t. But it certainly looks like he could. How can we stand by idly while we let the masses vote on whether minorities can exercise equal civil rights? It’s quite likely that for years after Brown v. Board (and maybe even up through today), if we had put integration up to a popular vote, we’d still be segregated. Look at our rich history of civil rights, and you can easily see how we require iconic heroes to make headway, not majorities. How does it feel to see the finish line of equality and intellectual honesty and then suddenly and relentlessly be pulled backwards, back toward the dark ages full of human inequality and cruelty? Feels like shit. [<]
  2. See NOW [<]
  3. See Printz v United States, 521 U.S. 898 (1997) [<]
  4. See First Amendment [<]