Cancer: My Buddhist friend

Introduction

My presentation today concerns my struggle with two cancers and is in three parts:

• A purely clinical description of my condition and treatment;

• Why I consider my cancers to be my Buddhist friends;

• Some general observations and philosophical musings.

A clinical description of my cancers

I was diagnosed with terminal cancer (Stage IV, liver)* in September of 2012. Shortly thereafter, I was put on a chemotherapy regimen, but was told I would have only about 5 to 8 months to live. However, that was 17 months ago and my condition has been stable for the past nine months. I've seen CT scans of my liver, which looked just awful when I was first diagnosed. There were at least 16 dark spots, each the size of a dime, covering the entire liver. And that's just from the front-side view of that organ.

About nine months ago, a CT scan showed the cancer was 95% gone. Yes, there were still some stubborn dark spots, but even they were reduced in size. My oncologist was extremely pleased, saying I had responded extremely well to chemo. But, he added, my condition is terminal. So far, I've undergone 22 cycles of treatment, each consisting of 3 weeks. On the first Monday of each cycle, I would receive an IV plugged into my Power Port which would dose me with Cisplatin** and Gemcitabine***. The next Monday, I would be dosed only with Cisplatin; the third week would be a rest week in which I didn't get any medication.

My doctor told me that most patients are only able to tolerate between 6 to 8 of these three week cycles. At that time, their bodies would show signs of toxicity, in terms of outward physical manifestations and the presence of certain tell-tale markers in the blood. But I've undergone 22 cycles of treatment, without any of these signs. As it turns out, there's a reason for this which lies in my genetics. I have a defect referred to as BRAC 2 which made me susceptible to cancer in the first place but which, ironically enough, also made me a good candidate for these particular drugs.

There are two cancer markers my doctor looks at in my blood samples in order to evaluate how well my chemo is working. For marker CA 19-9 (RE: liver): My blood test on Jan. 7, 2013, showed a decline from 1349 on Dec. 4, 2012, to 296. To put that in perspective, my first blood test on Sept 29, 2012, showed a count of 15,256 - with a non-cancerous person typically weighing in from 0-35. For marker CEA (RE: colon): My highest count was in Sept. 2012 (182) and on Jan. 7, 2013, my count was 2.4. Normal is between 0 - 2.5. So...here I'm normal.

And the news kept getting better as each month passed. I've been within normal range for both of these markers for the past nine months. Now, that doesn't mean the cancer can't come roaring back to life. It might develop an immunity to my chemo drugs, forcing a switch to other drugs which aren't nearly as effective. Or my body might finally show signs of toxicity. It seems that Cisplatin in particular is a very horrible poison that does major damage to the body. So it might only be a matter of time until I fall prey.

I might also fall victim to a blood clot breaking loose in my right leg - where I have a condition called DVT (Deep Vein Thrombosis). I was told that was a frequent cause of death among patients in my condition. To minimize the danger of clots, I've been taking Warfarin (a blood thinner) ever since October, 2012. But that's a mixed blessing. If I'm taken off the blood thinner in order to, say, get a liver transplant, I'm at risk of a damaging blood clot going to my heart or lungs. If I stay on the blood thinner, I would bleed to death on the operating table during the transplant procedure.

As things stand now, I don't have much of an appetite but I haven't lost any weight. I'm still at 175 pounds, as I've been for about a year now. I still have all my hair and am not bedridden. I go out by myself just about everyday, and even shoveled snow with my son for 45 minutes about a week ago. I sleep a lot, though - up to 12 hours per day (off and on) - and feel weak and know I've lost muscle tone. My spirits are high and I enjoy talking to people - which I don't have much of an opportunity to do but feel a great uplift when it happens.

When I go to my chemo sessions, I see the other patients there - about 8 or so - and see a group of defeated, tired, withdrawn sad sacks. Sure, I have moments like that, but I've noticed it really helps to have a positive attitude. I haven't vomited for the past six months or so and when I go to the toilet, I haven't been constipated or suffered from diarrhea anywhere near as often as during my first eight months. I'm trying to walk more often, but in this particularly cold and snowy Chicago winter, it's been hard.

Overall, though, I feel pretty good, so I know I have a lot to be grateful for.


Cancer as my Buddhist friend

In Buddhism, at least as I've come to know it, there is a concept called "having a good friend." Simply put, a good Buddhist friend is anything or anybody that brings you closer to actively seeking enlightenment - but not only for yourself, for others as well. This "friend" could be someone or something actively seeking to do you harm. That might seem odd, but it is written that even devils have it in them to protect the Buddhist law, simply because they themselves - deep down inside - want to become buddhas.

I don't tell people "I'm dying of cancer," but instead say, "I'm living with cancer." Maybe it would be more accurate to say, "I'm wrestling with a cancerous condition," but that's a little too complicated for casual conversation. It's funny how I've been exposed to two very different movements that promised the possibility of an extremely long lifespan. I'm talking about millions of years in the same body. One of these movements was my year with Re-evaluation Counseling (or RC, for short). Their idea was that co-counseling was a tool that could rid you of the psychological baggage and traumas that were constantly undermining your health and vitality.

The other movement was Buddhist. Having compassion for all living beings is not only the prime point of Buddhism but is also responsible for determining the length of one's lifespan. That's right - the more you care for others and act upon such caring, the longer you live. I've outlived my oncologist's original prediction, but I want to go on and beat that by a couple of million years - at least. I want to go to my doctor's office for a review of my bloodwork and CT scan, and have him ask, "Okay, Steve, what did you do with the cancer? It's all gone - not a trace."

I'd like to say that my Buddhist practice was responsible. Moreover? I'd want him to believe that. As strange as it sounds, recovering from cancer will prove far easier than living without it. I'm 62-years old and don't have much in the way of financial resources. I live on my pension as a state civil servant - about $1900 per month - and I have about $4,500 in the bank. That's it - no stocks, no bonds, no property, no car, no investments. Over the past 15 months or so, I gave away about $10,000 to an out-of-state friend who is in far more desperate straits than I am. Frankly? I'm glad I had the opportunity to help and would do it again.


Some general observations and philosophical musings

For the past 17 months, I've walked the line between life and death. And I've come to appreciate both - especially to become unafraid of the latter. Sooner or later, death comes to us all. But so does rebirth - that's the hard part to embrace. I keep telling my son that I'll be back, so if I happen to pass on suddenly, that he should keep an eye open for any unusual or strangely familiar child he might "happen" to cross paths with. But if I don't come back to him - if my bodhisattva mission brings me to other places - I will always think of him. I hope I live long enough to see the twins (their first children) which he and his wife will be blessed with in September. But if not, I won't mourn that loss.

The Buddha once said, "I don't have it in my heart to love one or hate another." I hope to always have that sense of equanimity, hoping to expand my sense of compassion beyond the limits of love. My wish isn't so much to get to know my grandchildren but that they - somehow - encounter the writings I've posted on my blog. These are teachings and musings that I hope will benefit them and, hopefully, spare them from the pain of having to learn certain things I've had to learn the hard way. My hope in this regard extends to everybody - young and old.

I am humbled and awed by the loving kindness shown by my ex-wife. We were married for 20 years, separated for five, and divorced ten years ago. I was living in a friend's house when I was diagnosed. But she took me in, caring for me in her house for 15 months, until I recently moved into our son's house. Our divorce had a great and negative impact on her, which lasted for years. But I am glad I had the chance to live with her again and see how much she has grown as a human being.

Part of my condition has an upside - an ability to sense things others don't. Maybe they're too busy with the demands and trials of living in our contemporary society. So maybe that's blunted their senses. But I've acquired the ability to be stunned by the commonplace - a sunrise, a rock seemingly out of place on a sidewalk, a walk down the block, a deeply-drawn breath that has an unexpected ability to revitalize, an oddity in a movie which I'm sure no one else notices. I've always been sensitive to my surroundings, having worked most of my adult life to cultivate this. But my current condition has sharpened this sensitivity.

I noticed that I indulge in remembering past incidents in my life which were embarrassing or not well handled. "I could have done this," or "I could have said this"...you know, I woulda, coulda, shoulda. I am surprised at how often and with what clarity I would replay certain of these episodes in my mind. Maybe I was trying to learn as many lessons as I could, but I still find it remarkable. It is said that we shouldn't dwell in the past. Well, I hate to say it, but too many of us do exactly that - which is kind of like spinning our wheels.

I'm a bit disappointed in two of my Buddhist friends - those from my days as a member of the Soka Gakkai - who know of my condition, yet avoid me like the plague. It's not that I hunger for the company - far from it. I thrive far better than most in my times of solitude. My wish to see them is for their sake, not mine. A friend of mine who noticed my general aloofness toward the affairs of the world said, "You're not from around here, are you?" I knew what she meant and said, "No, but neither are you." She was a homeless person I met on the street, who I ended up living with for four years - off and on. We never had a romantic relationship but I found our connection to have been richly rewarding.

I have learned that you can find riches in the most unlikely of places. But having a conforming mind absorbed in the dramas of day-to-day life manages to rob most people of those riches.


A closing thought

I saw a reenactment of an explorer's deathwalk in a movie about an expedition to Antarctica. This was in the late 1800's and showed this man with his fellow explorers. But his feet were so badly frostbitten, he knew he was being a burden on his comrades who were trying to hike to safety. But he was only imperiling them by slowing them down. A snowstorm suddenly arose and the scene I saw was of him walking away from his comrades into the blinding curtain of snow, slowly disappearing from view as he hobbled away. He knew he was going to die and he knew what he had to do to give his friends a chance. I only hope that I can be that brave if it turns out that I have to be.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Steven Searle, just another member of the Virtual Sangha of the Lotus and
former candidate for US President (in 2008 and 2012)

Contact me at bpa_cinc@yahoo.com

Footnotes

(Stage IV, liver)* - I also have colon cancer, but only to a far lesser extent than my liver cancer. Interestingly enough, these two cancers had arisen independently of each other, this not usually being the case.

Cisplatin** - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cisplatin


Gemcitabine** - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gemcitabine

Thou Shalt not Lie

No, the Ninth Commandment does not state: “Thou shalt not lie.” It says, “Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor.”

I’ve read on-line posts which claim the Ninth Commandment, in effect, tells us not to lie. But that’s simply not true. Consider the following from Source A*:

Let’s say you were living in Nazi Germany and hiding Jews fleeing the holocaust. Would you break the intention of the commandment by lying to an SS Officer and saying that you’ve not seen any Jews, even though they are hiding in your closet? In such cases, the greater interest is justice for the innocent.

That author would have done better to replace that last sentence with this:

Since the Ninth Commandment deals with bearing “false witness against,” you wouldn’t be breaking that law since you didn’t say anything against your neighbors – the Jews you are hiding. In fact, giving them away would violate this one – “Thou shalt not kill.” If you lied, saying you hadn’t seen any Jews, you could claim to be “bearing false witness in favor of [my] neighbor.” No law against that! [NOTE: I will deal, later, with what if the Commandment actually said, “Thou shalt not lie.”]

That author, by saying “In such cases, the greater interest is justice…” is guilty of being dodgy by not answering (as I did) in terms of the Commandment itself. This same author shares, in that same posting, this anecdote:

A pastor walking through his neighborhood came up on a group of boys trying to out-lie each other. The kindly parson, overhearing a few whoppers, asked the boys what they were doing. They explained they’d found a puppy and decided the one who told the biggest lie would get to take it home. As you can imagine, this disturbed this man of the cloth. He looked each boy straight in the eye and told them all they should be ashamed of themselves, that when he was their age, he never told lies. The boys all bowed their heads and shrugged their shoulders in shame and their leader, picking up the puppy, handed it to the minister and said, “You win, you get to keep the dog.”

Being the mischievous soul I am, I would have been tempted to hack into his website and alter that last sentence to read:

The boys all gasped in amazement and their leader, picking up the puppy, handed it to the minister and said, “You win, you get to keep the dog, for you just now told a whopper that out-lied any of us.”

I know, I know…the author didn’t intend that meaning, but it sure jumped out at me…and struck me as being hilarious.

What about where he wrote (above): “As you can imagine, this disturbed this man of the cloth.” Why should he be disturbed at all? Since the boys were lying to each other without any intention of harming anyone – and each knew the other was lying (in which case, whatever was said wasn’t a lie in the sense of being an attempt to deceive anyone) – the preacher was just being a dick by trying to shame these boys.

Look at the wording of the Ninth

“Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor.”

I’ve already dealt with the “against” part – what about the “neighbor” part? I looked up the word “neighbor” from Source B*, which says:

QUOTE:

1.    One who lives near or next to another.

2.    A person, place, or thing adjacent to or located near another.

3.    A fellow human.

4.    Used as a form of familiar address [like “Howdy, neighbor!”]

[Also included are the following:]

·       To lie close to or border directly on.

·       To live or be situated close by.

·       Situated or living near another: a neighbor state.

Word History: even though one can now have many neighbors whom one does not know, a situation that would have been highly unlikely in earlier times. The extension of this word to mean "fellow" is probably attributable to the Christian concern with the treatment of one's fellow humans, as in the passage in Matthew 19:19 that urges love of one's neighbor.

:UNQUOTE.

I duly note, here and now, that Matthew 19:19 was written after the Ten Commandments had been given to Moses. So I think we can disregard this from the definitions of “neighbor” listed above: “a fellow human.”

However, if we do that, then apparently the Commandment could be rewritten to say:

“Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor but it’s perfectly okay to do so against those who are not thy neighbors.” In other words, it’s only sinful to bear false witness against “folks like us.” We might not feel it right to embrace a Commandment that exclude others but…that’s what the words mean.

As for “bearing false witness against (someone),” what about saying something that isn’t true but which also isn’t against anyone? For instance, if some fool got up in the public square and insisted (even though he knew better) that the world was flat, he would be guilty of intentionally lying. But he wouldn’t be guilty of saying anything “against” anybody. Or would he? If someone in the audience were to believe this lie and act on it in such a way as to cause him loss or harm, then the lie would have had the effect of being against someone (that is, to his detriment).

But…maybe such a lie would be better prohibited by the “Thou shalt not steal” commandment. For by telling such a lie, the fool attempts to “steal” from the gullible listener something we all have a right to possess – an accurate description of physical reality.

The Four Agreements

Don Miguel Ruiz wrote a best-seller called The Four Agreements, which are basically four rules of conduct necessary for a virtuous life:

1.    Be impeccable with your word

2.    Don’t take anything personally

3.    Don’t make assumptions [Side Note: This would have given Euclid fits, since he built a vast body of work based on making “assumptions” – aka axioms.]

4.    Always do your best

Right off the bat, I liked the fact that God is not mentioned anywhere among these four rules. By saying that, I’m not weighing in on whether God actually exists or not. I’m merely saying, living a virtuous life doesn’t necessarily have to involve an external, higher being.

But I digress. Focus on #1: “Be impeccable with your word.” According to Source B*, impeccable means “without flaw or error; faultless.” But does that mean such words must be devoid of lies?

The Buddha, whose speech must surely be regarded as “impeccable,” never lied or so it is claimed. However, he is also praised for having used “expedient means” in order to teach his disciples – “means” which sometimes took the form of telling a lie. The idea, I suppose, is that lies told to help someone attain enlightenment aren’t really lies. But…I don’t buy that for a moment, as I explained in my essay, “Why did the Buddha lie to us?” at:

http://ind4prez2012.blogspot.com/2011/04/why-did-buddha-lie-to-us.html

I can only speak for myself, but I regard “impeccable” speech as being completely free of lies.

Back to the beginning

Toward the beginning of this essay, I wrote:

[NOTE: I will deal, later, with what if the Commandment actually said, “Thou shalt not lie.”]

Let’s reconsider what Source A* said above:

Let’s say you were living in Nazi Germany and hiding Jews fleeing the holocaust. Would you break the intention of the commandment by lying to an SS Officer and saying that you’ve not seen any Jews, even though they are hiding in your closet?

If the Ninth actually stated “Thou shalt not lie,” the only proper response would be to tell that SS Officer, “I’m not going to tell you.” Of course that would prompt a search of your premises which would quickly reveal the Jews hiding in your closet. But do you really think that officer would have accepted your answer and walked away, if you had told him you’d not seen any Jews?

Maybe, maybe not. Some people calculate the odds on answers to questions like this before speaking. If they thought it highly probable the SS man would believe them, they might risk lying. If they thought otherwise, they might say, “I’m not going to tell you” knowing full well they themselves would be punished after the inevitable search turned up closeted Jews.

Under those circumstances – an SS man in your face – would it be worth risking your life to keep the “Thou shalt not lie” commandment? Maybe the better question would be: Would it be worth your soul not to keep that commandment?

Side note: I’m going to purposely ignore the possibility of asking God/Jesus for forgiveness (and it being granted) for violating a commandment. For when one asks forgiveness, one is saying they won’t ever commit the sin again. But we know full well, that if our hero survived the first SS officer asking this question, he would lie again if confronted by a second SS officer. How many times can one break a commandment and ask for forgiveness before it becomes obvious that the breaker will always continue to break?

The uncomfortable but honest position must be: If the Commandment said “Thou shalt not lie,” then that is what is meant. Even at the cost of your own life? Yes, but I hasten to add: “Too many people cling to life (or at least their idea of life) when they really should let go.” That might be easy to say, but (you might object) how many people could be brave enough to stand up to an SS officer like that?

The answer to that question is, “Not as many would have had to be that brave if more people had been more honest way before Nazism had a chance to become the state religion of Germany.” A lot of little lies allowed a great evil to take root. The lesson? Maybe it would be better to get out of the habit of telling (and accepting) so many little lies that have a way of getting out of hand.

Steven Searle, just another member of the Virtual Sangha of the Lotus and former candidate for US President (in 2008 & 2012)

“Try it out for yourselves in your personal lives, to live according to a ‘Thou shalt not lie’ commandment.”

Contact me at bpa_cinc@yahoo.com

  *Source A = http://hastingspresbyterian.blogspot.com/2007/09/ninth-commandment.html

  * Source B =http://www.thefreedictionary.com/neighbor

Is the Soka Gakkai a cult?

Opening Statement

I think everybody should join a cult at one time or another in their twenties. It doesn't matter if you really "believe," since the experience itself will be an eyeopener for the rest of your life.


Sample Anecdote

I'm going to end this essay with a series of anecdotes concerning my religious cult experience, but I can't resist offering a sample now.

In the mid-70's, I attended a chapter meeting which was held in a member's apartment. After the meeting, the group leader made an announcement. He said the leader directly over him was getting married and he thought we should all chip in to buy him a wedding gift - a $2,000 stereo system. That was a lot of money at the time, and when he sensed a bit of hesitancy from the members, he sternly declared, "I'll pay for it myself if I have to."

Everybody loved this particular groom-to-be, but I thought it was a violation of our principles for this guy to be soliciting money like this. Yes, money was periodically solicited for the organization, but never for the benefit of leaders. I wish I wasn't so shy back then, or I would have spoken up and said, "This is wrong." For the record, I didn't donate a dime.

Later, this groom-to-be was heard to declare, "So-and-so should get a job and not have to crash on other people's couches. This is why we're practicing Buddhists - to prove that we can get whatever we want by chanting for it." Yeah, right.


Statement of Purpose

In my early twenties (back in the mid-1970's), I was a member of a religious cult which is still around today and is currently known as the Soka Gakkai International. I was a member of this pseudo-Buddhist laymen's group for about two years, though I don't know if it's as cultish now as it was then. My purpose today is not to determine its current status, for these simple reasons: it failed in its mission to bring about world peace (as it promised it would) when twenty-years passed (it's been almost 40 years now), and its current membership is about the same now as it was in the 1970's - having become irrelevant.

My purpose today is to relate some anecdotes stemming from my direct experience, not only during those initial two years but also during a period when I rejoined - from 1993 until I was barred from meetings in January of 2009.


SGI-USA background

SGI-USA = Soka Gakkai Interntional - USA region.

When I joined the SGI-USA in 1974, I was 23 years old and living with 3 roommates in a 4-bedroom flat near Chicago's hillbilly heaven neighborhood - near Wilson Ave and Clark. My share of the rent was $40 per month out of my $5,200 per year US Dept of Labor salary. That's right - I worked downtown across the street from the just about completed Sears Tower, making the lordly sum of $100 per week. Don't laugh - I was actually able to save money back then.

A lot of young people hung out in this flat, since they were friends of my roommates. One day, I walked in on a group of 4 of them in the living room chanting to a scroll in a box. They were recent converts in an SGI-USA street recruitment campaign. I decided to give it a shot, so I joined too, though not immediately. Once a week I would go to District meetings - the District being the basic building block of the SGI organization. These meeting took place in a members' homes and typically included between a dozen and 20 members.

These members were divided into Men's, Women's, Young Men's, and Young Women's groups, each having their own leaders and assistant leaders. Two or more Districts made up a Chapter. I know there was at least one level higher than Chapter, but all together these groups made up the Chicago region which had exactly one Community Center. We didn't call it a temple or church, but in all of Chicago, there was only one such Center. I liked the idea that most of the meetings took place in people's homes, but we were encouraged to go to the Center once per week in order to connect with our larger community.


The Promises

There were several promises made to SGI members. The first one: You can chant for anything you want. That is, you could chant for a new car, a job, a girl friend...anything. And you were encouraged to be specific instead of just chanting for happiness (or even enlightenment!) in general.

The second promise: You can attain enlightenment in this lifetime in your current form. That was a little tricky, since we weren't told we could actually become fully-enlightened Buddhas equal to Shakyamuni Buddha. In fact, much later I heard this revision: "Buddhahood is not a destination but a journey." When put that way, it sounds like a carrot on a stick being dangled just out of reach but never to be reached. I rejected the SGI's view of Buddhist practice, since I believe the purpose of practice is to become a Buddha. Maybe not in this lifetime, but I certainly believe it is possible. And I came to see why that state could not be reached in one lifetime - at least not for 99.9999% of us. It certainly didn't happen in the case of SGI President Daisaku Ikeda - that should have been enough to warn us away.

The third promise: We will realize world peace in our lifetime. In fact, in the 70's we used to sing a song with the line, "Keep chanting, keep chanting, we've just got 20 years to go." The idea was to convert one-third of the world's population so they would become active chanters. Another third was needed to support the first third, and the last third was expected to not actively oppose the chanters. These are the three promises I heard in the early seventies. Obviously, the SGI failed as far as their 20 years to go promise was concerned.


Give them something to do

One of the basic rules of any organization is to give its members something to do. Just chanting and studying about Buddhism is too passive. So in the 60s and 70s, the SGI had this idea to form marching units to participate in local community events. For the young men, there was the Brass Band; for the Young Women, the Fife and Drum Corp. So I bought a saxophone and joined the Brass Band, with our most ambitious plan aimed at New York City in 1976. At that time, NYC was so broke, the city wasn't even going to stage a bicentennial celebration on the Fourth of July. So the SGI-USA leadership said, "We'll do it!"

And so I, along with members from all across the country, prayed and practiced for a year in advance so we'd be ready to do our part for the Big Show. Of course, each of us paid our own air fare and living expenses for the three days we'd be there. No problem - it was honor to step forward and save the world. We really felt like pioneers in the vanguard of a new social movement. We felt such a movement was necessary after we had lived through the horrors of the unrest caused by the Vietnam War and Civil Rights riots.

But...after we came home from New York, we were exhausted, burned out from our massive, year-long, labor of love. A lot of the members even stopped going to district meetings, since they felt a bit lost at sea with this huge campaign being over with thereby giving us a lot of time on our hands. The leadership then declared Phase Two as the new order of the day. We were no longer expected to sacrifice so much of our time and energy to the organization, but to personal growth instead and to the nurturing of new members.

I didn't hang around long enough to find out exactly what Phase Two was supposed to entail. I quit, and didn't have any contact with SGI members again until 1993. At that time, I met a member who invited me to an SGI meeting. She was a student at the university where I worked, who informed me that the "excesses" (read: cult-like behavior) of the past were growing pains that had been overcome. She told me that President Ikeda cleaned up our act in the USA. I thought, "What? He was part of the problem, since nothing could have happened here without his approval." But I said nothing, merely making a mental note to myself.

In 1993, I rejoined. But I was determined to do it my way. That year, by the way, I bought a copy of the newest English-language translation of a core Buddhist text, the Lotus Sutra. This version, previously unavailable, was sponsored by the SGI itself but was actually written by a non-SGI scholar - an internationally recognized translator from Japanese and Chinese into English. Dr. Burton Watson, an American, who had received his PhD from Columbia University.

Dr. Watson's translation became a great source of joy and personal enrichment for me. It also opened my eyes to how badly the SGI had gone astray. Local SGI members came to know me as someone who asked a lot of questions, which had proved awkward for members and leaders alike. No doubt, this is why I was finally told to leave the SGI in 2013. Leadership decided to circle the wagons and purge undesirables like me - before they started losing members.


Anecdotes

ONE:

Local district meetings gave members a chance to chant together but, more importantly, to introduce guests to our practice. Hence, these were called discussion meetings. After we chanted, if there were any guests, a few of us took turns explaining the history and nature of our particular brand of Buddhism. Then the chant leader, or a visiting higher-up, would offer closing comments followed by a Q&A.

So far, so good. But...these were never really discussion meetings. If a guest had some in depth questions and tried to pry more info from the leader, he would always be told (something like), "I could try to describe to you what a chocolate cake tastes like. But until you try it, you'll never know." End of story - end of discussion. I all the years I was with SGI-USA, I never found anyone who would (or could) directly answer my questions. I was usually encouraged to, "Chant on it."

The three local-level leaders I had the most contact with in the 1970's never tried to have a real conversation with me. Such conversations that we had were minimal, to say the least (literally). Ironically, this even extended, years later, when one of our particular yearly campaigns was dubbed "The Year of Friendship and Dialogue." Yeah, right.

TWO:

In the early 70's, I was invited to a district-level Young Men's Division chant session. There were four of us present, including the Chapter chief. He chanted the sutra so fast, I couldn't keep up. Another guy had the same problem. After we finished chanting, there weren't any words of encouragement, no "thank you for giving up part of your Saturday for this activity," and certainly no dialogue. We just got a disapproving look from the leader who said, "At least this guy (the fourth in our party) tried to keep up." And then he left!

Years later, I ran that episode by one member who (I thought) was capable of occasional flashes of honesty concerning the practice - but only if he and I were out of earshot of other members. His comment? "Anyone who's chanting that fast isn't practicing correctly." My take? This was just a cheap attempt by this chapter chief to make us think we weren't trying hard enough, just trying to make us doubt ourselves. As I found out years later, it wasn't ourselves we should have doubted.

THREE:

David's 900-page letter to me. When David passed away (in the 90's), I went to a memorial service held for him at the Chicago Community Center. And I got up to speak, holding up a bundled stack of 900-handprinted pages. David had spent about a year writing this epic response to the many questions I had concerning our mutual faith. I thanked his spirit before the congregation, many of whom had heard of this heroic effort of penmanship. He didn't have to do this, but he did. And it made for interesting reading. But...it didn't really answer my questions.

And there couldn't have been any doubt as to what my questions were, since I had gone to several chanting meetings with handouts I'd prepared. These cited, chapter and verse, what my very specific questions were. My intention was to find answers from the members - from ordinary members or leaders, I didn't care which. I had even put my personal contact info on these handouts if anyone wanted to call me later. Sometimes good answers to questions don't occur immediately, so I wanted to let people know I really wanted their opinions, even if offered on another day. But nobody ever spoke to me about these issues; no one ever contacted me.

When the prayer bell was sounded to close the memorial, the guests stood up and mingled. Dale, a veteran member of 30 years, whom I'd known in the 70's, walked up to me as I was showing my letter to a number of people. He heard me repeat that this was David's response to my questions, to which he offered, "Well, I guess that showed you." His unmistakable meaning was: "Well that ought to shut you up."

Dale and I didn't have much contact in the early years of my practice, but I do know that some of my questions made him bristle. And his blind faith made me bristle, but I tried to be a non-confrontational gentleman about this. After all, he was the leader of the district I was in when I rejoined SGI in 1993. However, it seems he still harbored at least a mild distaste for me personally. In any event, no one there asked if they could borrow this letter to read for themselves. Somehow, I wasn't surprised.

FOUR:

Joe and Phil were two members I'd known in the 70's, both of whom were low level leaders. Joe actually introduced me to this Buddhism and Phil had been one of 3 roommates I lived with during a six-month period in the 70's. I don't know what happened between the two of them. But I remember sitting in a car with Phil, when Joe approached and starting pounding on the window. I could see he really wanted to have words with Phil and looked violently angry. He kept yelling, "Open the door." And Phil kept saying, "Fuck you."

Phil didn't open the door and Joe eventually left, after which we drove away. Neither of them ever spoke of this incident again to me. I can only guess that, perhaps, there were tensions due to their roles in the organization that had caused them to cross swords. Or maybe it was a case of one guy hitting on another guy's girlfriend, or disparaging words having been spoken publicly. I had no idea, but I remember being very upset by this. I am very slow to accept anybody as a role model for anything, since I'd come to know that many gods have feet of clay. But these were people I knew who were putting in an awful lot of time and effort to realize world peace. And yet they weren't being very peaceful toward each other.

Later, as I came to study Buddhism in greater depth, I learned about the virtue of not giving rise to anger. Perhaps so, but it is hard to be young and dispassionate.

Years later, I heard that Joe had moved back to his ancestral home in the south, becoming a born again Christian. Strange as it might seem, I didn't have a problem with that. I feel that Jesus Christ is a bodhisattva - a stealth Buddhist - who presented Himself to the world in a form that was agreeable to the hungry multitudes of the West. It might appear that Joe had given up on Buddhism, but then I remembered something I read in the Lotus Sutra (a core text of the SGI which, I'm sad to say, too many members only gave lip service to). It said (something like): "It is hard to uphold this sutra, but the buddhas of the universe will be pleased to witness anybody who can uphold it even for a short while."

Translation? You did good, Joe. I hope you'll reconsider Buddhism - this time, not in the SGI context - and find your own meanings from these profound teachings. And when you do, I hope you'll share them with me.

FIVE:

We were getting ready for the New York City bicentennial parade, which meant we did a whole lot of chanting at the Community Center. That's also where we had practice drills for what we'd be showing off to the world as we marched down the Avenue of the Americas. I was chanting with a half-full room of members, when I remembered an announcment made earlier: "Let's chant until 10 o'clock (pm)." That was said hours ago, so as 10:00 approached, I rang the bell to signify that the chant session was officially over. So the room fell silent, but it didn't take long for two firebreathing young men to run up and scold me: "What are you doing? There are people here - leaders - who want to continue chanting."

They were obviously angry at me, but later I thought: "So what's stopping them? We've rung that bell before to officially close a chanting session, only to have those who wanted to continue chanting do so." Then I thought, "What a bunch of Nazis."

SIX:

It was almost time for us to fly to NYC for the Fourth of July, 1976 celebration. Hey, Liz Taylor was going to be our parade's Grand Marshall. Good times, right? We had a few more Brass Band practices at the Chicago Center, one of which featured a leader "encouraging" a member to get a haircut. This member had long hair, but that was the style back then among many countercultural groups. Lo and behold, I saw this same member with a haircut at the next practice. But the result was a bit of a compromise, being longish yet obviously styled by a pro. I could tell this wasn't quite what the leaders had in mind, but they didn't say anything - at least not in front of the rest of us.

When I first joined, I was told I didn't have to give up anything. SGI wasn't like the Hare Krishnas insisting upon a certain style of dress. And we could even continue practicing our lifelong faiths, as long as we included Buddhist chanting among our other practices. I guess, when push comes to shove, members of groups should expect pressure for at least some degree of conformity. But...of course we weren't told that when we first joined.

SEVEN:

In the early 90's, I went to the Center and walked in on a leaders' meeting. In those days, such meetings weren't closed off to non-leaders. I heard one young woman explain the Three S's - in this order: Sensei, Soka Gakkai, Self. We were supposed to support the International leader, Daisaku Ikeda, above all else. Then we were to chant for the mission of the Soka Gakkai, which was the vehicle by which world peace would be realized. Finally, we could chant for our own happiness.

Then I remembered something that Ikeda's predecessor said. Tsunesaboro Makiguchi told his members that his own life was nothing compared to the importance of the Soka Gakkai. Looks like Ikeda reversed the order of the first of the two S's. What happened?

END COMMENT:

If it looks like a cult and acts like a cult, it is a cult. It takes a lot of effort to decultify a movement, but sometimes that's exactly what we have to do in order to protect the core teachings from corruption. As time goes by, I'll be posting more of these revealing anecdotes.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Steven Searle, Just another member of the Virtual Sangha of the Lotus

Contact me at bpa_cinc@yahoo.com

"No," Noah...a soliloquy in the dark

About Your threatened flood, I still stand by my refusal to build the Ark. I speak these words even though I don't know if You hear them. But I guess all I have is time, though I don't know how much, in which I'm to remain in total darkness with no bodily sensations. Maybe You have shorn me of my body, leaving behind only my spirit. I'm not sure what to make of that, though I'd like to think You're testing me.

That's what I thought when You first ordered me to build an Ark, since You were about to destroy all of the world's living beings. I tried to wrap my mind around that but was too overwhelmed by the awfulness of it all. Especially for the sake of the animals who wouldn't be brought on board the ark. What did they do to deserve death by drowning?

I know I should have been thinking of all of the people who would perish, people whom You called wicked. So why did the animals come to mind? I asked if You could have merely willed the wicked off the face of the earth. With all of Your power, I wondered why You felt it necessary to flood the world. That seemed like overkill to me. I thought, "Surely my Lord must be testing me." But even if You weren't, there was no way I could be a party to such a massacre. You said I was the only righteous man left in the world. That must mean, You at least respected my judgment, my ability to tell right from wrong. And what You were proposing was certainly wrong - no two ways about it.

Which is why I thought You were testing me. And I still think You're testing me, but it's hard for me to bear Your absence and Your silence. You used to walk with me, which made me want to please You with the best behavior I could muster. Maybe the world wouldn't have degenerated into such an evil state if You had walked with the others. Many others. I don't understand Your aloofness and Your apparent indifference. In Your Holy Presence, say in the middle of a raging battle, I know soldiers about to kill their enemies would behold Your Holy Countenance and would drop their weapons and drop to their knees, asking You for forgiveness for what they were about to do.

But You were nowhere to be found, except - on occasion - with me.

So I told You I would not build the Ark. But I also said I would not advise my sons to also refuse should You decide to order them instead. I simply said No, turned my back on You, and walked away. My aim was to live in the wilderness but You had other plans. I didn't get far, when all of a sudden I found myself in total darkness without any bodily sensation. My feet didn't feel the ground they might have been standing on. I didn't even feel that I still had feet.

You surrounded me with Void, so now I ask a favor. If You intend to keep me in this state forever, I ask that You dis-create me. Rather than punish me for eternity, I would rather "become" as if You had never created me in the first place. Ashes to ashes, dust to dust - it is written. But the truth is: Nothingness into somethingness back into nothingness if Your humble subjects should request this - and if You should approve.

You told me of this ark I was to build and of details concerning my survival at sea. I had a dream that I slaughtered animals from among the ark's passengers so as to make for You a burnt offering. I know this is a common practice dating back to the first family. But in my dream, I saw the faces of the other animals as I killed, gutted, cleaned, and then roasted the sacrificial animals. Those onlooking faces were so sad, I vomited with disgust upon waking from this dream. If I could be so disgusted, how not You? Who could think You could possibly be pleased by the scent of roasting animal flesh?

Of course I don't know if You went ahead without me and flooded the world anyway. Maybe You decided to also destroy my sons and their wives, deciding to start all over again and create a new Adam. I found myself hoping You would never tell him what happened to his predecessors. Best to let the new Adam think he is the only Adam. Or maybe You decided not to flood the world, instead deciding to adopt my suggestion that You walk more frequently among men - as many men, women, and children as You could.

Maybe someday I'll be allowed to know what You decided. After You finish testing me. You are testing me, aren't You?

Hello, Hello?

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Steven Searle, just another member of the Virtual Sangha of the Lotus and
former candidate for President of the United States of America (in 2008 and 2012)

"I got to thinking of this whole Noah's Ark episode when a very Christian friend of mine concluded, 'Whatever caused that Flood wasn't the Lord God in Heaven - there's simply no way He would have murdered all of those innocent animals."

Contact me at bpa_cinc@yahoo.com

Slamming my own religion?

Today, I want to give equal time. I've expended a lot of effort on this blog slamming the Abrahamic wisdom traditions and promoting the alternative I've embraced - Buddhism. But I realize my faith's worldview has its shortcomings, which I feel duty-bound to mention. These stem from my immersion in the Lotus Sutra*. I don't intend for this post to cover all of my concerns or doubts but I want to at least broach these few*:

• The infinite number of emanation buddhas which Shakyamuni Buddha was able to generate;

• The infinite number of meanings which are generated by the One Great Fundamental Universal Law;

• Why it bothers me that the Buddha lied to us.

Emanation Buddhas

Shakyamuni Buddha wasn't the only entity able to generate an infinite number of emanations of himself to teach the path to enlightenment in other worlds. This was an ability shared by all other buddhas as well as highly advanced bodhisattvas. And this is an ability mentioned frequently in the Lotus Sutra. But then a question formed in my mind: "Are all of those emanation buddhas of Shakyamuni also able to generate an infinite number of emanations; and are those emanations able to, in turn, do the same; etc, etc?"

If the answer is "yes," then credulity is strained, but perhaps that's the point: To force the believer to either rise to the occasion and come up with "the" answer, abandon his faith, or modify it somehow. I'm almost afraid of modification since some of my fellow Buddhists have accused me of trying to create my own religion. But I rarely allow what people think of me to have any appreciable influence.

I realize that the word "infinite" as used in the Lotus Sutra simply refers to a monstrously large number but is not really infinite, mathematically-speaking.

In any event, I don't know why this particular question occurred to me as late as it did. After all, I've recited the entire Lotus Sutra well over 150 times over the past 7 years. So why didn't this question occur to me much earlier? Perhaps my tardiness was due to a blind spot I had in my own enlightened nature. Or maybe my karma was at work. If so, I admit I'm a bit embarrassed by my flaw, even though I can mitigate that somewhat by saying, I've gained a number of insights which (so far as I can tell) no one else has realized. [I can only hope these are really insights and not just self-indulgent delusions!]

One valuable lesson I'd learned from my years in the Soka Gakkai International: "Try to develop doubt-free faith." Too many of my fellow SGI members took that to mean, "We shouldn't ask questions or probe too deeply into the doctrines." But then I remembered another SGI lesson, about the value of having a seeking mind. I shudder to think perhaps SGI was only paying lip service to that lesson. If so, how ironic, that a group that extols the benefits of chanting should be reduced to "paying lip service." [Sorry, I could never resist a good pun - or even a bad one, for that matter.]

Undaunted, I will cherish the title of the Lotus Sutra's fourth chapter ("Belief and understanding" - how important it is to have both), and the urging of the Buddha to "ponder this Lotus Sutra." So I will undertake to reflect deeply on the implications of the infinite emanations of the buddhas. For now, I want to offer a few tentative thoughts regarding this issue:

• Though buddhas might have the ability to create these emanations, perhaps not all of them do so.

• Not all buddhas have identical practices. I don't know if any buddhas other than Shakyamuni recruited and taught the massive number of unique disciples known as the Bodhisattvas of the Earth, as introduced in the Lotus Sutra's 15th chapter entitled "Emerging from the Earth." They are "unique" in terms of the totally renunciative life they led. Then there's the case of Many Treasures Buddha (introduced in Chapter 11 of the Lotus Sutra) who had taken a vow to travel with his funerary tower (comparable in size to the moon) to any place in the universe where the Lotus Sutra was being preached.

• If a disciple was being taught by Shakyamuni Buddha on planet earth, did emanations of this buddha teach emanations of this disciple? That leads to the question: Do each of us have an infinite number of versions of ourselves dwelling in an infinite number of universes which, once we make up our minds to seek enlightenment, will be taught by an infinite number of emanation buddhas?

• Is such a large number of emanated buddhas necessary so that the Law could be preached to animals, plants, or even to inanimate(?) beings such as stars, rivers, and rocks? Even these are supposed to have a buddha-nature which could enable them to become buddhas someday.

I'm going to be thinking about all of these possibilities - and any others that might pop into my mind - as time goes on. For now, I can only be amazed at the wonder of it all.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Steven Searle, just another member of the Virtual Sangha of the Lotus and
a former candidate for President of the United States of America (in 2008 and 2012)

Contact me at bpa_cinc@yahoo.com

Footnotes

Lotus Sutra* - This refers specifically to the version translated into English by Burton Watson and published in 2009 by the Soka Gakkai International, which bears this title: "The Lotus Sutra and It's Opening and Closing Sutras," commonly referred to as the Three-Fold Lotus Sutra. If you want a free, on-line version of a Burton Watson translation (though not the one published by the SGI), go to:  http://nichiren.info/buddhism/lotussutra/

broach these few* - Today, I will only address the first of these three topics; within the next week or so, I hope to address the others.