Divine Mother Complex

Yesterday, for the first time in twelve years, I got hugged by Indian guru and divine mother Ammachi . Ammachi, known as “the hugging Ma” is considered by her devotees an avatar, or an incarnation of God (or, in this case, Goddess). Her primary activity is traveling the world, often giving thousands of devotees at a sitting the divine dispensation of unconditional love in the form of a deeply heartfelt and holy hug. I have literally watched her do this non-stop for hours and hours at a time, without a break, greeting and embracing each person in an endless line of people as if they were the first.

My first hug from Ammachi was such a disaster that it took me twelve years to go for another. I think after yesterday’s experience, I may wait even longer for my next hug—maybe forever.

When I first met Ammachi, it was the early 90’s. I drove out to her ashram in San Ramon, east of Oakland, California. The place looked like it had been a ranch. I arrived in time for her morning darshan (Sanskrit for “meeting God”) at the old barn where it was being held. There were about two or three hundred of us there. I must admit I was skeptical. I felt spirituality had to do with divine understanding, and could not understand what could be gained by receiving a hug—no matter how loving—without a good dose of teaching to go along with it. But although Amma did sometimes teach, the main event around her seemed to be the hug.

I got in line with a mixed crowd of folks, many of whom seemed to be suffering physically or psychologically. I guess they were in need of some divine motherly love. For my part, I was too proud to admit I might need some of the same, but always ready for a new experience, I waited patiently on the off-chance that with the hug might come some transmission of spiritual insight or bliss.

I finally reached Ma after standing in line for what may have been an hour. An usher gently pushed me forward onto my knees and into her arms. Ma is a small but round Indian woman. An Indian sari covered her ample yielding flesh. She hugged me to her bosom at first, but then did something unexpected. She placed her hands on my head and pushed my face into her lap. It felt like I was drowning between her full soft thighs, my face mostly covered by the folds of her sari. Barely able to breathe, I tried to lift my head up, but she applied more pressure, pushing me down. Finally, gasping for breath, I pushed harder against her. She then lifted my face up, holding it between her hands, looked into my eyes, and, between repetitions of the mantra “Ma, Ma, Ma”, grinned and laughed at me. This went on for only a moment before she again pushed my head down into her lap with surprising strength, for another deep dunk between her thighs. She played this game with me several times, waiting until I was gasping for breath, pushing up against her hand as hard as I could, then lifting me up and laughing in my face, with a kind of girlish—naughty girlish—charm. Finally, she laughed again and let me go. I wandered away from her chair not knowing quite what hit me.

A lot of water has gone under the bridge since that last hug from Ma. Over the years, my focus on intellectual understanding waivered. I began to wonder whether spiritual insight alone is all it’s cracked up to be. I started to feel that maybe the real secret is, as so many have taught, a heart full of love. After all, insights come and go, and different traditions use very different words and concepts. But what they all seem to point to, when all is said and done, is love. However you get there may not matter as much as whether you can find a way to embrace life, despite its inevitable pain—to love it, to love oneself and to love others.

Over the years I thought of going to see Ma again when she made her annual trips to the area where I live. Many of my friends always went, and they invariably spoke glowingly of the experience. But each time she came, I never seemed to find the time to make the hour drive to the ashram and to stand in line for what now, I heard, was often several hours, for a hug. But yesterday, I had nothing pressing at work, and it was a beautiful day for a drive to the country. Besides that, I felt called. So I took the leap and drove to Ma’s.

I arrived at an ashram much changed over the years. There were parking lots and parking attendants, and organized shuttles from the outlying lots to the main buildings. The barn had been remodeled into a simple but elegant hall. Due to the numbers of devotees, and the need for crowd control, tokens were given which determined the order of your hug. I got one in the group “1000-1100.”

I watched for hours as Ma sat royally, yet relaxed, and received one devotee after another. A tangible energy seemed to emanate from her end of the hall. I felt, at times, almost like I was watching a biblical scene. Holiness and peace pervaded the atmosphere. At times, I felt almost moved to tears, without knowing why. I watched and meditated and finally, after about four hours, it was my turn.

This time I was determined to put my natural skepticism aside. I had learned that in order to truly see the divine, you had to have faith. While discrimination is good, too much doubt clouds the vision. I decided I would open to Ma, as much as I could, as the embodiment of the divine feminine, as the embodiment of Mary, Tara, Shakti and all the other holy mothers and goddesses, as a manifestation of divine love.

Just in front of me was a mother with a three-year-old son. She placed the boy in Ma’s arms, and the child went completely limp. He laid in her arms in total relaxation, completely abandoned and surrendered. Ma herself seemed surprised. She opened her arms up and, with the boy still collapsed on her, lying utterly still, she laughed and said to us around her, “Look at this! Look! Look at this!”

Now it really was my turn. I tried to abandon myself to Ma as much as the young boy had. I collapsed into her arms. She hugged me to her. My head laid on her left breast. She leaned her head over mine, and said into my ear, loudly, “Ma, Ma, Ma” over and over again. Abandoning myself to the moment even further, I began to repeat “Ma, Ma, Ma” after her. It seemed involuntary. I was lying on her breast, repeating “Ma, Ma, Ma.” I noticed that as my mouth opened and closed to say the words, my lips were opening and closing on a wrinkle of her sari’s cloth, just over her breast, approximately where her nipple would be. I felt like a child, like a baby really, saying “Ma, Ma” and opening and closing my lips as if to suckle. Then I lifted my head, made a pranam to her, and it was over.

Like the first time, I wandered away half in a daze. At first I was happy. “That seemed to go well,” I thought. But then I began to think about what happened. Was my mouth really opening and closing on her breast as I said, “Ma, Ma” like a baby? Did anyone notice this? Did Ma notice this? Was she offended?

I had a fantasy that in the middle of my abandonment, one of the large orange-robed swamis who always seemed to be in close attendance to Ma noticed what I was doing. In my fantasy, his face darkened with outrage at what he felt was my obscene disrespect. He came over, picked me up by the scruff of the neck and—in a history-making move—had me physically ejected from Ma’s presence, to my undying shame.

How could I have let myself regress so far? Why would I do such a thing? What is wrong with me, I wondered? And I felt a bit dislocated from the event through my whole drive home, and for several hours afterwards. The spell finally broke—thank God—when my girlfriend got home from work, I told her the whole story, and we both almost collapsed on the floor with spasms of laughter at the absurdity of the whole thing.

In the end I think I’ll always be grateful to Ma for this experience. It is only due to her grace, that my career as a spiritual devotee is (I think) finally over. I don’t think I can look again to a guru for enlightenment or bliss. Ma killed that tendency with holy embarrassment and buried it with divine mirth.

Six Days In Fallujah

After six days in Fallujah, it is estimated that about 1,000 insurgents have died.

One wonders how one distinguishes an insurgent from an Iraqi civilian. One wonders how many civilians have died, and why no one mentions them.

Fallujah is a city about the size of Berkeley, California. It has been besieged by about 10,000 U.S. troops for the last 6 days. Will there be anything left of Fallujah when the battle ends?

It is acknowledged that Al-Zarqawi and the other terrorist leaders who made Fallujah their base left the city before the U.S. troops got there. Where are they hiding now? What is the next city that must be destroyed in the search for them? How many cities will be destroyed like Fallujah?

Destroying a country to save it is a strange and savage strategy. How many Viet Nams and Iraqs will it take before a better way is found?

Liberty blind-folded

I dreamed I saw the Statue of Liberty wearing a white blindfold. Her torch was half covered by a black shroud.

I asked the shaman what the dream meant.
He said, "This is a hard dream."

"The torch represents peace."

He did not say more. He did not have to.

More Americans are creationists than accept evolution

Is it any wonder that conservative Christianity has such a strong influence in the U.S.? It's hard for some of us to fathom, but most Americans identify themselves as creationists, and reject scientific evolutionary theory. This is from a report on a 2001 Gallup poll:

Americans More Likely to Identify Themselves as Creationists Than as Evolutionists

Gallup has asked Americans several times over the last 20 years to choose between three statements that describe the origin and development of the human race. Generally speaking, the plurality of Americans have come down on the side of a creationist approach to human origins, while slightly fewer have agreed with a statement that reflects an evolutionary process guided by God, and only a small number have agreed with an evolutionary process in which God had no part.

Most recently, in Gallup’s February 19-21 poll, 45% of respondents chose "God created human beings pretty much in their present form at one time within the last 10,000 years or so," the statement that most closely describes biblical creationism. A slightly larger percentage, almost half, chose one of the two evolution-oriented statements: 37% selected "Human beings have developed over millions of years from less advanced forms of life, but God guided this process" and 12% chose "Human beings have developed over millions of years from less advanced forms of life, but God had no part in this process."
The public has not notably changed its opinion on this question since Gallup started asking it in 1982.

A full report on the poll can be found here.

I should know better but, even though I am interested in religion and spirituality, I continue to be shocked at the prevalence of literalistic and fundamentalistic beliefs in the U.S. The last election is certainly a wake-up call on this issue.

Is it a failure of the educational system that allows so many Americans to reject science in favor of literal biblicism? A federal trial began yesterday in Atlanta, Georgia over a school board's decision to place stickers in student's science texts, warning them that evolution is merely "a theory, not a fact" and should be "approached with an open mind, studied carefully, and critically considered." A NY Times report on the case can be found here.

In 1987, the U.S. Supreme held that requiring the teaching of creationism in public schools' science classes violates the separation of church and state. The Cobb County school board involved in the sticker case is apparently testing the limits of the earlier case, arguing that creationism isn't being taught--students are just being encouraged to be critical of the theory of evolution. But if even school board's foster doubt about evolution--the basics of which have been amply demonstrated scientifically--then is it any wonder that so many Americans reject science and hold onto outdatedly literal religio-mythical beliefs?

Dream of a talking chicken

I dreamed that my friend and I were hungry. We were served a whole chicken for dinner. My friend tried to cut it with no success. It seemed that the knife was dull or the chicken was tough. Suddenly, the chicken turned into a woman. She moaned, and, half unconscious, said to my friend, "Why are you cutting me?" My friend dropped his knife. We carried the woman to a couch to recover. I turned to my friend and said, "Let's get outta here and go get some brown rice and tofu."

Speaking Of Morals--A Poem by Stanley Arcieri

(Note: I received this very apropos poem from a friend today via e-mail. Thanks, Stanley)

Dear young people, soldiers,
pulled into the morass of Iraq
should not die
to prove that Bush's Iraq war
is just and right
nor to prove
it is wrong.

Their one-shot unique lives
are precious
beyond all measuring.
Wars of choice, not necessity,
are immoral.

Speaking of morals.

Democratic morals from Michael Lerner

Today's San Francisco Chronicle has an interesting article about an alternative morality to inform our politics, by Rabbi Michael Lerner of Tikkun Magazine .
Lerner argues that religous or spiritual values can equally--or more strongly--support a liberal and compassionate political agenda, instead of that of the conservative religious right.
How about "Feed the poor; clothe the naked; shelter the homeless" ??? Where'd that get lost in the politics of the Christian right?

The article can be found here. Excerpts are reproduced below:

Imagine a party line of awe and wonder
Democrats losing voters betrayed by materialism - Michael Lerner
Sunday, November 7, 2004


For years the Democrats have been telling themselves, "It's the economy, stupid." Yet for years, millions of middle-income Americans have voted against their economic interests to support Republicans who tap a deeper set of needs.

Tens of millions of Americans feel betrayed by a society that seems to place materialism and selfishness above moral values. They know that looking out for No. 1 has become the accepted wisdom of our society, but they want a life that involves more -- a framework of meaning and purpose that would transcend the grasping and narcissism that surrounds them. Many of these voters have found this "politics of meaning" in the right. In the right-wing churches and synagogues, these voters are presented with a coherent world view that speaks to their needs. ....

Imagine if John Kerry had been able to counter George Bush by insisting that a serious religious person would never turn his back on the suffering of the poor, that the Bible's injunction to love one's neighbor required us to provide health care for all, and that the New Testament's command to "turn the other cheek" should give us a predisposition against responding to violence with violence.

Imagine a Democratic Party that could talk of a New Bottom Line, so that American institutions are judged to be efficient and productive not only to the extent that they increase financial performance, but also to the extent that they increase people's capacities to be loving and caring, ethically and ecologically sensitive, and capable of responding to the universe with awe and wonder.

Imagine a Democratic Party that could call for schools to teach gratitude, generosity, caring for others and celebration of the wonders that daily surround us. If the Democrats were to foster a religious or spiritual left, they would no longer pick candidates who support pre-emptive wars or who appease corporate power. They would reject the cynical realism that led them to pretend to be born-again militarists. Instead of assuming that most Americans are either stupid or reactionary, a religious left would understand that many Americans on the right share the same concern for a world based on love and generosity that underlies progressive politics.

Religion is theft

Influential French anarchist Pierre-Joseph Proudhon said, "Property is theft." On an absolute level, I tend to agree. Except perhaps for the Creator, none of us can claim ownership over anything on earth more than anyone else. Everything we have is a gift. Everything we possess is just a loan.
In the same way that all the natural resources we need to survive are a gift of the earth, we are each given a direct connection to a well-spring of spiritual truth and experience. If we want to, we can each connect with this lifespring for ourselves. No church, doctrine, priest or guru can be said to own spirituality. So, to paraphrase Proudhon, "Religion is theft."

The dream of the Rat

I dreamed I saw a rat. I remembered a shaman told me that if I ever dream or have a vision of an animal, I should pay close attention. If I can, I should ask the animal what it has to teach me.
I looked at the rat and he looked up at me. I asked the rat, "What do you have to teach me?"
The rat gave me a whiskery smile. Out of the side of his mouth he said, "Why do you hate me?"
I told him, "I hate you because at night you come into the crawl space of my house and make noise in the walls. The sound of your chewing keeps me up all night, and I cannot get any rest."
The next day I told the shaman my dream. He said, "Your dream is an important one. It has something to teach you.
"The animals only disturb us because we disturb them. We have so much and they have so little.
"This is like the rich people and the poor, the wealthy nations and the impoverished nations. The poor people's hunger and their efforts to get more disturbs the wealthy's peace, and the wealthy hate them for it.
"You should share what you have learned from this dream."

Is it "moral" to suppress science and melt the icecaps? Bush thinks so.

From the Washington Post:

U.S. Wants No Warming Proposal
Administration Aims to Prevent Arctic Council Suggestions
By Juliet Eilperin
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, November 4, 2004; Page A13

The Bush administration has been working for months to keep an upcoming eight-nation report from endorsing broad policies aimed at curbing global warming, according to domestic and foreign participants, despite the group's conclusion that Arctic latitudes are facing historic increases in temperature, glacial melting and abrupt weather changes.

State Department representatives have argued that the group, which has spent four years examining Arctic climate fluctuations, lacks the evidence to prepare detailed policy proposals. But several participants in the negotiations, all of whom requested anonymity for fear of derailing the Nov. 24 report, said officials from the eight nations and six indigenous tribes involved in the effort had ample science on which to draft policy.

The recommendations are based on a study, which was leaked last week, that concludes the Arctic is warming much faster than other areas of the world and that much of this change is linked to human-generated greenhouse gas emissions. The Arctic Climate Impact Assessment -- produced by a council of nations with Arctic territory that includes the United States, Canada, Russia and several Nordic countries -- reflects the work of more than 300 scientists.

Several individuals close to the negotiations said the Bush administration -- which opposes mandatory cuts in carbon emissions on the grounds that they will cost American jobs -- had repeatedly resisted even mild language that would endorse the report's scientific findings or call for mandatory curbs on greenhouse gas emissions.

An early draft of the policy statement -- which is set to be issued two weeks after the 144-page scientific overview is released Monday -- included a paragraph saying that to achieve the goals set under a 1992 international climate change treaty known as the Rio Accord, the "Arctic Council urges the member states to individually and when appropriate, jointly, adopt climate change strategies across relevant sectors. These strategies should aim at the reduction of the emission of greenhouse gases."

The administration has pushed to drop that section. As one senior State Department official who asked not to be identified put it, "We're bound by the administration's position. We're not going to make global climate policy at the Arctic Council."

The World Wildlife Fund's Arctic Program director Samantha Smith said the council's scientific conclusions, which said temperature increases in some parts of the Arctic increased tenfold compared with the last century's worldwide average rise of 1 degree Fahrenheit, justified immediate action.

"This is the first full-scale assessment of climate change in the Arctic and it shows dramatic changes in the region, with worse to come if we don't cut emissions," said Smith, an observer at the negotiations. "We challenge the Arctic governments to come up with a real response to the science, before the foreign ministers meet in Iceland in November."

Administration officials said they are hesitant to endorse policy recommendations before examining the full 1,200-page scientific report on the Arctic.

Hail Pacifica!

In another world, in a parallel universe, I could imagine the northeast and the west coast seceding from the union. Northeastica and Pacifica--that's where almost all the U.S.'s wealth, creativity and good food is anyway. Leave the Bush-loving red state rubes to their own devices, their repressed homosexuality, their heathen gods of flag, football, McDonalds, Walmart and America uber alles.

Planning for the next regime change

There is a lot of soul-searching going on about what went wrong with the last election. How could the Bush-league Butcher steal it again?
The scary thing is the degree of disconnect between those of us who found voting for such an inarticulate, dangerously adolescent, intellect- and curiosity-stunted xenophobe incomprehensible--and the majority of Americans who seem to mainly react to the push-button "moral" issues of the Christian right.
So, now whattawedo?
Salon magazine has some interesting opinions on this subject here.
My two cents:
1. Don't hold back and don't be too polite
I don't think there has been such a collision of world-views in this country since the 60's and early 70's. Then it was "freaks vs. straights." Today, it is the Christian right vs. a much more amorphous collection of liberal, progressive, humanist, libertarian (and more) viewpoints. What is our common thread? This can be hard to find, and that difficulty makes it hard to have a unified impact. But there are certain things we have in common, I think-- a love for freedom, tolerance, diversity, and a strong commitment to the separation of church and state. We need to talk up these values without reservation. We shouldn't hold back. We need to show that our morality is higher than dogma. We have to be outspoken about it. Forget centrism. The sea change brought about by the 60's (civil rights, women's rights, gay rights, spiritual diversity, consciousness exploration and expansion, tolerance for non-conformity, etc. etc.) didn't come from being polite. We need to speak out and tell the truth with some degree of immoderation.
2. Be patiently impatient
Tell someone some truth every day. The change of people's hearts is the change that matters. Be willing to effect change one person at a time.

A new look

Yes, folks, we have a new, simplified, streamlined look. More importantly, this dormant blog is about to re-awaken itself, and (I hope) you, too.