Do You Know the Way to Light? A sermon about enlightenment for Divali

Do You Know the Way to Light?

A sermon about Enlightenment for Divali 

Rev. Robin Landerman Zucker

First Unitarian Church of Pittsburgh

October 28, 2012

Some time back, I clipped a cartoon from the New Yorker magazine for my fridge showing two bald, robed yogis sitting lotus-style in an ashram (or spiritual retreat) under the watchful eyes of a Shiva statue. One is turned to the other, saying: “I’d read so much about it beforehand that I couldn’t help being disappointed when I actually became enlightened!” 

Of course, the ironic humor of the cartoon resides in the unlikely notion that anyone who had genuinely achieved enlightenment would remain so earthbound and cerebral as to be disappointed about anything!

For the most part, religions do hold out some possibility of enlightenment, and you needn’t don robes, and sit on a cushion in a mountain cave to get a taste of it. To “enlighten”  or “to shed spiritual light upon”  represents the central purpose of religion in the first place. And Hinduism, the religion we are exploring together this morning, is no exception. In fact, the pursuit of light, the immersion in one’s inner light, and the Hindu festival Divali, the annual celebration signifying the journey away from spiritual darkness, typify this illuminating religion – colorful, wise, peaceful, mythic, and accessible, especially for us religiously open-minded, mystically-inclined Unitarian Universalists.

Hinduism is an ancient religion, with its roots in India. Scripture includes the sacred wisdom texts known as the Vedas; the Hindu devotional classic, the Bhagavad Gita, and a collection of spiritual dialogues known as The Upanishads.  As my Harvard professor Diana Eck explains, “Hinduism embodies a rich sense of plurality saturated by a Oneness in the one Supreme Being, Brahmin.” 

It is a polytheistic faith, in which adherents can worship or undertake a devotion practice (or puja) to more than 330 million Gods and Goddesses, each embodying different legends and a particular desirable attribute. Some of these deities are more prominent than others (and we find several of them on our special Divali altar this morning).  For instance, Lakshmi, the primary focus of the Divali celebration, represents prosperity. Ganesha, the elephant God, represents wisdom, Kali signifies strength, and Saraswathi is the goddess of knowledge.

During Divali, celebrants offer puja (or prayer) in honor of a favored Deity. Houses all over India twinkle, as families eat special foods, exchange gifts, and set off fireworks.  Rows of wicks within diye, clay lamps filled with mustard oil, light the way to welcome the Hindu god Rama, who returned thousands of years ago to reclaim his kingdom after 14 years in exile.

            It’s been said of Unitarian Universalists, not inaccurately  – “if you’ve met one…well, you’ve met one!”  The same can be claimed, even more emphatically, of Hindus.  They are not all like Mahatma Gandhi, or Deepak Chopra, or a Bollywood movie star; nor do they all resemble TV’s Apu, the Hindu Quik-e-Mart owner on The Simpsons, and devotee of the elephant Diety Ganesha, who admonishes the irreverent Homer Simpson to “stop feeding peanuts to my God!”

If you were to ask a Hindu the central question of this sermon: “Do you know the way to light,”  she would explain that the answer will be given in two parts.

First, she may suggest you alter the question to make it plural. Do you know the ways to light? Hinduism contends that there are many paths to the summit; “many strings in the lute,” as the poet Tagore tells us.

The great Hindu swami, Vivekananda, who helped introduce his relatively exotic tradition to America at the 1883 World Parliament of Religions, once remarked that “truth is a pathless land. ”  This suggests  (at least from my perspective) that truth itself exists beyond or outside of a single chosen path, while the paths themselves, practiced faithfully, also represent vehicles of truth leading to greater spiritual depth, self understanding, perhaps,  even enlightenment, as known as liberation (or moksha).

The Transcendentalist movement in the mid 19^th c within Unitarian Universalism was strongly influenced by the spiritual foundations of Hinduism.  In Henry David Thoreau’s classic, Walden, the author writes: “In the morning, I bathed my intellect in the stupendous and cosmo-gonal philosophy of the Bhagvat-Geeta..in comparison with which our modern world and its literature seem puny and trivial.” He notes quite poetically that “The pure Walden water is mingled with the sacred water of the Ganges.”

Ralph Waldo Emerson learned about Hinduism from his formidable aunt, Mary Moody Emerson, and by the 1820’s, he was writing about India in his journals.  He  obtained copies of the Bhagavad Gita in the 1830’s and began publishing excerpts from the “Ethical Scriptures” in The Dial, the journal of the transcendentalist circle.

“Unitarians were increasingly drawn to India’s religious ideas: its insistence on the oneness of the divine, the presence of the sacred in all existence, and Hinduism’s capacity to point to the transcendent unity of diverse paths and ways.” (Diana Eck) We hear the resonant strum of Hinduism’s lute strings in Emerson’s definitive transcendentalist essay entitled, “The Over-Soul.” He writes: “Meantime within man is the soul of the whole [Hinduism’s Atman]; the wise silence; the universal beauty, to which every part and particle is equally related; the eternal ONE. “ [Hinduism’s Brahman].

Ralph Waldo and Henry David understood that the second part of the answer to our central question: Do you know the way to light? is a brief two-word response: Inquire Within.

Like all religiously authentic people, Hindus are expected to take their religion off the shelf and personalize it through dynamic actual existence, to find keys to their own enlightenment through spiritual practice, devotion, and discipline. One must walk the talk, or find oneself walking and talking and stumbling and learning through as many cycles of incarnations (or samsara) as needed on this earth to work out one’s karma (that is, deeds from past lifetimes).

There is no golden ticket to punch.  Lakshmi  isn’t going to drop prosperity into the lap of any devotee. Through mindfulness and practice, the devotee must discover enlightened ways to bring more prosperity into his or her own life. Perhaps by practicing what Buddhists call enlightened self interest – an act which benefits both the individual and the community.

Yoga, a spiritual practice connected explicitly to Hinduism, and which I practice myself, is anything but newfangled. Evidence of yoga postures were found on artifacts that date back to 3000 B.C. as well as in the oldest-existing sacred Hindu text, the Rig-Veda.

The word, “yoga”  actually means “to yoke with the divine,”  not “to cripple oneself trying to bend in half like one’s far-more-experienced and limber teacher!”

Physical forms of Yoga have gained enormous popularity in the West, and sadly, have been corrupted by some teachers and schools, becoming competitive and hard-edged. I mean, “Boot camp Yoga” - do I detect a disconnect there?

Yet, Yoga is not just physical asanas. Devotees also practice jnana, yoga of the intellect; bhakti, which centers on the heart, karma yoga (the only most closely associated with Gandhi) which motivates right action, or “the way of works,”  and, raja yoga offers a path to God through experimentation on the Self. 

True yoga must be taken off the mat and into the world! Sweat all you want, bend and balance, and practice and breathe…but  by all means, bring some raja and some bhakti to your effort; inquire Within. Otherwise, it’s just a fitness class with an exotic twist.

Through yoga or another chosen dedicated practice of meditation and self-knowledge, we can awaken, by realizing that Atman, the pure soul within each person, and Brahman, the Ultimate cosmic reality, are one.  The light of the Universe shines within us, through us, and around us. We each shimmer like a knot in Indra’s fabled cosmic net.

Do you know the way to light? Inquire Within.

One of the aspects of Hindu teaching  I most savor is the use of wisdom tales and riddles, often with some amusement or a twist, to illustrate concepts as complex as enlightenment.

In the classic Hindu wisdom tale , Tat Tvam Asi, a seeker went to a great master, a renowned yogi.  Bowing reverentially in the traditional manner he said: “O master, I seek enlightenment, please initiate and teach me so that I may attain That!” The master replied in a kindly manner: “Certainly my son, tat tvam asi, which is Sanskrit for You are That.” The master continues: “The divine Self lives within you. Meditate on that Self, know that Self, merge in that Self, realise that Self!” The seeker was disappointed. “O master, I know all that already. Why, that very teaching was featured in this month’s Yoga Journal. Please give me the secret teachings, I want the real stuff!”

The master said: That is all I know. That is my entire teaching I have no secrets. There is nothing that I have not given you. However, if you are not satisfied, you can go down the road to the next swami’s ashram and see if he has something more suitable for you.” The seeker approached the other guru and said: “O master, I seek enlightenment, please give me the initiation and your most secret teaching so that I may attain That!” The guru said: “I do not give my teachings so easily. You must earn them. You must do sadhana, spiritual practice. If you are sincere then you can stay here and work for 12 years. Only in this way will you earn my initiation.”

The seeker was delighted: “That’s just what I wanted. That is real spiritual life, real sadhana. I’ll begin at once.” The guru assigned him the job of shovelling buffalo dung in the back paddock. The years went by. Each day as he shovelled the dung the seeker dreamt of his future enlightenment. He ticked the passing days and months off his calendar.

Finally 12 years were up; the great day arrived. He approached the guru with hands folded palm to palm. “O my guru, I have served you faithfully for 12 years. I request your teachings and initiation as you have promised. Please bestow your grace upon me.” The guru said: “My son, you have served me well. You truly deserve my teaching. Here it is: “Tat tvam asi. You are That, the divine Self lives within you. Meditate on that Self, know that Self, merge in that Self, realise that Self!”

The seeker became enraged. “What! Is that all? The guru up the road gave me that the first time I met him and I didn’t have to shovel buffalo dung for him for 12 years!”
 “Well,” said the guru. “That was your decision, but the truth hasn’t changed in 12 years.”   

Do you know the way to light? Inquire Within.

This tale strikes a particularly resonant chord for me because just about 12 years ago, I purchased tickets to hear a talk given by the Dalai Lama at MIT. He had been there at a symposium on science and religion ( a fascination of his, I understand).

When he came onstage, people went wild –“Elvis is in the house” wild! He sat in a chair and his feet dangled off the ground. He was like a large happy child in orange and red robes in an oversized Lazy-Boy. Gosh – why are these spiritual teachers always so much smaller in stature than the imposing figures we imagine them to be?

The format was Q&A and the questions began about how a seeker could achieve enlightenment. The Dalai Lama would listen and smile; a reverent silence  would pervade. Wait for it, he’s going to say something earth-shatteringly wise! “I don’t know, but that is a very good question,” replied the Lama, over and over again,  to more questions than not. In essence, the Lama was teaching us:  Inquire Within. Or as the Buddha himself revealed: I am not the moon. I am just another finger pointing at the moon.

A special form of smugness can pervade assemblies such as this  – one can practically smell the aroma of “I’m already more enlightened than the average Joe because I was wise and spiritual enough to purchase this ticket.”

Let me tell you - I thought there might be a collective meltdown in the room. People were annoyed. I paid 100 plus dollars for this!? Who made you a Lama anyway? I could sense how hard folks were trying to keep the serene “I belong here” expressions on their faces. It was squirmy and awkward, but the memory reminds me to check my projections about gurus, stay in the moment, inquire within.

Earlier this month, I traveled to Washington DC to hear the contemporary spiritual teacher Eckhart Tolle speak at the Warner Theater.  I admire him. He is deservedly popular, in my opinion,  and some of you may be familiar with his books. The event was advertised as “an evening of presence with Eckhart Tolle,”  so I suspected he would share his valuable insights about the egoic mind and the pain body and the enlightened moment  somewhat more off-the-cuff than his very smooth and accessible CDs.

When Tolle entered the stage from the wings, I sensed some surprise among the crowd that he was not more debonair. There he was, quite hunched over and diminutive, not especially GQ in his attire; the quintessential philosophy wonk.

His talk was extemporaneous and occasionally even a wee bit rambling, punctuated by an unexpected goofy little laugh. In pockets around the theater, I could feel frustration, impatience, a “get on with it, and tell me the secret” vibe. Tolle kept on. Some folks began checking their text messages, others fell asleep, while others stayed with him, as best they could, in the presence of the moment.

Was it life-changing? No. Was the experience yet another opportunity to seek stillness in the moment, the only reality I’m actually experiencing anyway, the only place I could possibly wake up and find even a shred of enlightenment?  Yes. So, the event delivered as advertised. 

Maybe you feel impatient or even agitated listening to this sermon, right now, in this moment, the only reality you actually experiencing. When is she going to tell us the secret? Maybe you are already wondering if there will be cookies at coffee hour today or if you’ll be able to follow the confusing repeats in the hymn we’ll be singing when I’m finished.

Do I know the way to your light? I have some ideas and resources to share, just like Tolle. But I say, yet again: Inquire Within. Whenever I sense in others a zeal to  line up behind me so they can “follow” me on the path, I tell them clearly: I am just another finger pointing at the moon. I am not your light. However, as your minister, I will stand here on the edge of the path and shine a flashlight down upon it, so that you might not trip quite so much along the way.”

In a nutshell: If a teacher, a minister, a therapist, anybody, tells you they have the secret password to your enlightenment, I suggest you strap on your sandals and head to the next village. Charlatans abound in the world of spiritual growth and even renowned teachers, roshis, yogis, ministers, and gurus have lost their way, been seduced by adoration, and fallen from grace believing they are the moon and not the finger pointing at it. 

When I lose my own way and find myself in a dark corner, when I fall out of the moment, I follow my own counsel, and I inquire within, reminding myself that I am not my self-defeating thoughts or emotions, my “egoic mind” or my “pain body”  -- I am the person aware of them.

Eckhart Tolle would call this a moment of clarity and consciousness. As best I can, illuminated at times by just a sliver of light, I stumble back to the present moment, the only reality I am experiencing anyway, the only place I could possibly wake up to any semblance of enlightenment.

By inquiring within we are reminded, through the richness and beauty of spiritual practices, including those found in Hinduism, how glorious yet limited we humans truly are; how forming some connection to the sacred enriches us; that we are flawed, yet improvable, through the practices of mind, heart, hand, and spirit.

We may awaken to an awareness that enlightenment is found in those moments of Being, the admission that we are not enlightened, and in some devotion to growth. We may find that in the open arms of Hinduism’s plurality,  we’re better able to recognize the arrogant Western preoccupation with exclusivist religions -- the ones which extol bigger, better, best; one-size-fits-all, one way to the Light, or be damned!

We may discover, yet again, that the way to light, be it through Unitarian Universalism or Hinduism, or any other legitimate path, requires intention in both our action and our stillness. 

Hear these words from Hindu sage Krishnamurti:

“When you understand the mind and the mind is completely still, not made still, then that stillness is the act of worship; and in that stillness there comes into being that which is true, and which is beautiful, that which is Light.”

Do you know the way to light? The truth has not changed for 12 years or 1200 years -- Tat tvam Asi. You are That.   

Inquire Within.

Jai Bhagwan (the divine in me recognizes and honors the divine in you.) 

© 2012  Rev. Robin Landerman Zucker. All rights reserved. Material may be quoted with proper attribution.

A Tale of Two Tattoos: A sermon towards forgiveness for Yom Kippur

A Tale of Two Tattoos

A Sermon Towards Forgiveness for Yom Kippur

Rev. Robin Landerman Zucker  

September 23, 2012

First Unitarian Church of Pittsburgh

            This is a tale of two tattoos -- a parable of regret and redemption.

        There  was a man  who had been a devout Jew. As a boy and young man, he had joyfully worshipped his God in the village shul, and he kept all of God's commandments and laws.

       When he entered his twenties, the man turned away from God, he rebelled against his law-laden religion, and went off to live in a faraway city. Once there, he chose a secular life, and in an act of clear defiance against his tradition, he had bold colorful tattoos inscribed over the surfaces of his arms and chest. Each time he admired the tattoos in the mirror he felt liberated from his restrictive past. But, one day he awoke and yearned to turn back to his God, to reenter his community. In keeping with tradition, the man knew that he would first have to undergo a mikva (or ritual bath) in order to purify himself before God prior to entering the temple. He returned to his village and hurried excitedly to the mikva.

         Once he had disrobed and was poised to step into the bath, a community leader blocked his way and angrily admonished him that, according to strict Jewish law, no one who had demeaned and mutilated himself through the act of being tattooed was permitted to enter the mikva for fear that it would defile the water.  The tattooed man sat dejected on the edge of the bath and began to softly weep. Would he never be reconciled again to his God or to his community?  would his tattoos forever be like the proverbial Mark of Cain,  preventing his redemption.

       A second man came upon him crying, and bent down to inquire of his suffering,  and the tattooed man explained his plight. The second man held out his arm, upon which one could clearly see a crude row of blue identification numbers that been tattooed there, against his will,  by the Nazis at Auschwitz. The Holocaust survivor took the tattooed man's hand and gently said, "Come. Let us step into the bath together."

       I love this tale because it is so  poignant, and also because it has everything to do with what I'd like to get at today in my sermon -- brokenness and wholeness, perfection and humanity, estrangement and reconciliation, forgiving and being forgiven -- the human condition in a nutshell.

     First, I'd like you to consider which of the characters  in the parable you most identify with. Is it the sincerely repentant tattooed man, whose  mistakes  have estranged him from his community,  but who  seeks the healing waters of forgiveness and redemption? Is it the perfectionistic community leader, who arrogantly steps into the shoes of a wrathful God and is unwilling to absolve the sinner?

    Perhaps it is the Holocaust survivor, who has somehow moved beyond the heinous trespasses against him despite the daily reminder of his tattooed forearm;  a loving comforter who forgives the tattooed pariah on behalf of his community and as a representative of a loving God?

       I 'd guess that each of us can identify with all of them in one way or another. So why is it that the words, "I'm sorry," the phrase, "I forgive you," and the admission, "I messed up, I am imperfect, Please forgive me,"  tend to get stuck in our throats?  Why do we often sit dejected on the edge of the bath, when the healing waters swirl nearby? Why don't we hot-tail it down the  dusty road out of Grudgeville? 

    September 17 was  Rosh Hashanah, the Jewish New Year, and September 26  is Yom Kippur, the  Jewish Day of Atonement. As some of you know, I was raised in a Jewish home. Yet, during my formative years at Temple Beth Shalom, the High Holy Days were more about "dressing up" than "fessing up." (I called it the fashion and forgiveness follies!) It wasn't until I was a young adult, and had decamped from organized Judaism, that I began to grasp the deep personal and the universal significance of Yom Kippur.

    Now,  even though I am a UU minister and no longer think of myself as religiously Jewish, I welcome this yearly opportunity for us to join in spirit with our Jewish neighbors to contemplate our transgressions; and to restore our right relation to ourselves, to  the Sacred as we each know it, and to one another. It is a time when we're meant to deal with remorse  in a healthy way, as we lift  oppressive guilt from our hearts and souls through forgiveness. It is a time  to choose the cleansing bath of self-love and renewal, rather than the hair shirt of  self-loathing.

     The Jewish wisdom text, the Talmud, explains that on the eve of Rosh Hashanah, God opens up three books: one for the completely wicked, one for the completely righteous, and one for those in-between. The completely righteous are immediately inscribed in the Book of Life. The completely wicked are immediately inscribed in the Book of Death.The average, or "in-between person," ( a description that likely fits most of us here at First Unitarian) are kept in suspension until Yom Kippur. They have ten days, known as the Days of Awe,  to make amends, to experience teshuva, or turning. A key passage from "The Gates of Repentance," the Yom Kippur liturgy book  explains:

      "The leaves are beginning to turn from green to red to orange," it reads. " The birds are beginning to turn and are heading once more toward the south. The animals are beginning to turn to store in  their food for the winter. For leaves, birds, and animals, turning comes instinctively. But, for us, turning does not comes so easily. It takes an act of will for us to make a turn. It means breaking old habits. It means admitting that we have been wrong, and this is never easy. It means losing face. It means starting all over again. And this is always painful. It means saying I am sorry. It means recognizing that we have the ability to change. These things are terribly hard to do."

       Who can argue that self-reflection is not easy, forgiving our imperfection is not easy, forgiving trespasses against us is not easy, renewal and rebirth  are  not easy. Teshuva does not come so easily for us.  But the alternative is no cakewalk,  either -- not forgiving begets hard feelings, hard hearts, a hard and heavy burden to bear, a one-way ticket to Grudgeville, and a hard road back to wholeness.

     In all honesty, I don't think I can go any further in this sermon without mentioning   "sin, " a very prickly and tough word to say and hear because it pushes so many hot buttons. "Sin," or what a colleague calls "the second most dreaded word in Unitarian Universalism."  Apparently,  there is some debate about whether it is the word "evil" or the word "stewardship" that takes the top prize! At any rate... venal sin, mortal sin, cardinal sin,  original sin -- it all gives some of us the willys! Unitarian Universalists are notorious for avoiding this topic. We even expunged the following line from Rumi's famous poem when we concocted our UU hymn #188: "Come, come, even if you have broken your vows a thousand times. Come, come, yet again, come." 

        So, what does a nice mystical humanist like me mean by "sin," and what does it have to do with forgiveness and with us UUs ? In my view, the liberal theologian Paul Tillich got it just about right  when he defined sin as our estrangement from the sacred as we each understand it (or what I will refer to in this sermon as "God," since it is the term used in the Jewish context),  and the corresponding separation from our best selves and from our community.  We lose the relational, we are  isolated from meaning; we are left in what Tillich calls, "sin."

       Remember that when Cain is driven from the Garden of Eden after the sin of killing his brother, he laments: "My punishment is greater than I can bear." As Tillich puts it,  sin (as estrangement)  becomes it own punishment. Don't we  see this outcome at work in the despair  of the tattooed man, and in the lack of connection we encounter in Grudgeville?

         I agree with Tillich that if we are to even consider a concept of God, then it is a loving, forgiving God rather than a wrathful, vengeful one who tends the wounded and chastised soul.  The Universe  wants us to be whole and reconciled, renewed in the warm healing mikva rather than stuck miserably on the cold hard edge of the bath.

       My former husband, David, a childhood altar boy (who is now a non-practicing Catholic/Taoist/UU) , recalls almost viscerally the palpable relief and renewal which accompanied absolution.  "I felt like I was in a true state of grace," he remembers. "There was something so potent about hearing the priest say I was forgiven -- my sin was lifted; I would walk out of church and the whole world would seem new to me, the slate was wiped clean. "

       A UU friend of mine here in Pittsburgh, also raised as a Catholic, puts a different spin on confession. She  recalls how her priest would begin each Lenten Mass by bellowing, "We are all sinners here." (and he didn't mean sin in Tillichian terms). For the remainder of the service, she would sqwunch down in the pew so that he couldn't see her sinful face or read her sinful thoughts. She knew that later she would have to confess her sins to him and she felt such anxiety and shame.

       She told me, "Now I confess my mistakes directly to Universe and to the people I've wronged. I don't want or need a surrogate. I can forgive myself and love myself now in a way that wasn't really possible back then." My friend concedes that it took a lot of practice before she could  eventually internalize forgiveness without hearing it from the mouth of a minister or a priest.

     It may surprise you to learn that the concept of sin figures prominently in the observance of Yom Kippur, as well; so much so that the traditional opening words of the service are: "By consent of the authorities in heaven and on earth, we permit sinners to enter and be part of the congregation." Typically, everyone in attendance assumes those words are addressed to him, to her. Religion and conscience have communicated the idea that they have not always been the people they should be, and it is to Judaism (and the Rabbi) that they turn for  an affirming message of forgiveness and acceptance; it is to God (or Yahweh) that they turn for transformation. 

      The point is that whether we are Jewish, Christian, UU, or otherwise, we need to recognize having done wrong, regret it, and resolve not to repeat it. We need to confess -- one way or another. It is a "terribly hard thing to do," but personally, it sounds  like something worthwhile. And we need to speak louder than the whispering citizens of Grudgeville.

Personal responsibility is key. Even if the proverbial scapegoat (the azazel form Leviticus) carries your sins, your mistakes on its back, you must go into the desert, too. As Rabbi Gluskin explains in our reading earlier, we are sent along to have the light of the desert shine on our souls while the goat carries our stuckness. Notice, though, that the goat does not zip off on its own. Rather, we walk alongside, reflecting and forming an image of ourselves that can survive without the destructive behaviors that create the need for forgiveness in the first place.

      Yet, to suggest that we're pardoned by God  for our misdeeds is not really accurate or even a statement about God's emotional generosity. It is a statement about ours. When push comes to shove, will we be the self-righteous community leader or the compassionate  Holocaust survivor?  Will we thrust forward a hair shirt or a helping hand?

       In our responsive reading earlier, we repeatedly recited: "We forgive ourselves and each other; we begin again in love."  That could well be a mantra for our times!  Especially, since some of us have no doubt internalized a message from parents, teachers, loved ones, and society that we are only deserving of love, praise, or forgiveness when we are perfect or pretty darn close. 

     It just isn't so.  In his book, How Good Do We Have to Be, Rabbi Harold Kushner argues that the most valuable phrase in the Torah  comes from Genesis 17,  when God says to Abraham, "Walk before me and be tamim." Although the King James translates "tamim" as "perfect" and the RSV opts for "blameless," Kushner prefers the translation, "whole-hearted." God asks Abraham to be whole-hearted and to have integrity,  not to be perfect. What about us? I believe that if we can learn to embrace our own inherent fallibility, and strive for wholeness rather than perfection, then we will also become  more capable of tackling the challenge of forgiving trespasses against us and against the community.

    In the novel, The Brother's Karamozov,  the character Ivan recounts in excruciating detail the atrocities he has witnessed on his journey across Russia, and he asks his brother Aloysha, "Is there in the whole world a being who would have the right to forgive and could forgive such a man? I echo Ivan's sentiments when I ask, How can we forgive, how do we forgive  the unfaithful partner or disloyal friend, the oppressor, the misbehaving President, the neglectful parent, the unfair teacher, the bullying sibling, the rapist, the child molester, the hate monger? When it is all happening to us, how do we deliver the goods?

     First, let's be clear. Forgiving is not condoning, soft-pedaling evil or downplaying  sin.  In the end, forgiving is about us and about liberating ourselves from the anger  and resentment of the past. Forgiving frees us of the double jeopardy of a miserable life added to the pain of the original wound.

    Forgiveness is a healing bath that can soothe  past wounds that we can neither change or forget. Surely, we see this notion exemplified in the Holocaust survivor. He  can not rewrite history or expunge sins against him, but he can make choices about his future -- will he be estranged or reconciled; courageous or self-pitying; broken or whole,  even when confronted with a painful and permanent scar? The people of Grudgeville face similar choices. So do we.

     I'd like to pause here for a brief period of silence in which we each might reflect on these choices. Who needs to hear the words, "I'm sorry" from your lips; from whom do you long to hear the words, "Please forgive me." How might this change your life? How might you find a way to get there?  (Pause for silence)

    The time for turning is at hand.  If you feel like the tattooed man, or like the Holocaust survivor, or like the mayor of Grudgeville,   take heart and look around you for a dejected comrade or for an outstretched hand. Your mistakes  are no more unforgivable. Your imperfections are no more remarkable. Even if you have broken your vows a thousand times, come, yet again, come. Consider whether the 10 days between Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur are called the "Days of Awe" because the feeling of forgiveness, given or received, is truly awesome.

     Forgiveness is not a magic pill that fixes everything or changes the past. But it can be that open byway to an unseen future that our painful past has shut. When we forgive, we look into the face of another and raise our voices above a whisper to utter precious words. When we forgive, we hold hands with the Universe, walk over a threshold, and experience the healing that is just  waiting for us to make it  real.

   We take one another's hand,  and we step together into the  mikva.

   Bless us now. Shalom and Amen.

c 2012 Rev. Robin Landerman Zucker. All rights reserved. Material may be quoted with proper attribution.

O Workers, Can You Stand It?

O Workers,  Can You Stand It?

Rev. Robin Landerman Zucker

First Unitarian Church of Pittsburgh

September 2, 2012

Seen any political ads lately? I would assume the answer is “Yes,”  unless you never ever ever watch  TV,  or you have been under a rock for the past couple months.

In one series of anti-Romney ads that have run fairly consistently, a former paper mill worker from Indiana tells the story of building a platform for visiting executives from Bain Capital who proceed to fire the entire workforce and shutter the mill that very day. He recalls, “I looked around and realized we had built our own gallows, and well, it made me sick.”

In another version, a woman fired from a Bain-owned company two years prior to retirement and receiving her pension, laments how her health insurance was cancelled, and as she remembers, Well, it broke my heart.”

There may or many not be a third ad in this series in which the former employee confides that the wholesale obliteration of his livelihood, “crushed his spirit.” If not, it would be a fitting finale to the other two. 

These ads are effective for several reasons:

1. They spotlight the priorities of venture capital firms like Bain- chop up companies, sell the profitable pieces, close down the unprofitable (or expendable) ones, and make big buckets of money, regardless of the human cost.

2. They lift up the physical, emotional and spiritual effects that collude when a person loses their job, their livelihood, and their vocation. Or, when the prospect of even having a livelihood or vocation is crushed and seems unattainable.

3. They ask us to consider the cost of consuming cheap foreign made goods in America, and how we consume and consume on the backs of a diminished human workforce who used to actually make things, right here in America.

4. They remind us that labor unions have been weakened by political and social forces to the point where companies like Bain can actually get away with such wanton disregard for decent Americans who work in paper mills and shoe factories and aluminum plants.

We cannot deny the tendency of human nature towards greed. Many of Mohandas Gandhi’s sayings are famous, but one that is appropriate for Labor Day is, “There is enough for everyone’s need, but not for everyone’s greed.” O workers, how can you stand it?

I have always admired people who can make things – not just fancy things or artsy things, but make things like 2 ton steel pipes, motherboards, and gigantic, perfectly sliced redwood lumber planks I saw stacked up in lumber yards in Northern California.

And I admire countries that value people who make things, whether in factories, or cottages, or blacksmithing huts. I admire the America that once valued its factory workers and its craftspeople enough to safeguard their jobs and wages.

Statistically, we are either #1 or  #2 behind China in global manufacturing production. Although this may shock you (it certainly surprised me), the truth is that we manufacture goods in America more than ever before, but technology has replaced human beings on the factory floor.

We still “do the work,” yet, in the past decade, six million manufacturing jobs disappeared and about as many people work in manufacturing now as did at the end of the Depression, even though the American population is more than twice as large today.

Some would say this is inevitable progress, and it is. Yet, as the Rev. Martin Luther King so astutely noted: “All progress is precarious, and the solution of one problem brings us face to face with another problem.”

For instance, one problem that arises here is that the workers who have been replaced by machines still have a human and social need to be of use, to submerge in a task, to derive a sense of self worth and identity from their labor.

And this dimension cannot be quantified through cost analysis (at least not financial cost analysis). On the balance sheet of emotional, social or spiritual cost analysis? Well, there the expense is high and the revenue quite low. Neither bread nor roses in the bottom line.

In an article for the Atlantic Magazine (Jan/Feb 2012) entitled, Making It In America, journalist Adam Davidson visits the Standard Motor Parts plant in Greensville, SC, to profile the state of manufacturing in the US through the lens of two employees, an unskilled worker named Maggie and a skilled worker named Luke.

Maggie, who has no higher education, completes an assembly process for fuel injectors. The only reason Maggie has a job at all, according to the owner Larry Sills (who seems like a decent person),  is because the part she assembles is too fragile to ship overseas to be completed by lower wage workers in their facilities in Poland, Mexico and China.

Luke fares better. He is one of a new class of factory workers who possess the advanced math skills and machine tool technology training to operate a complex (and obscenely expensive) machine called the Gildemeister. In the past, three –four people (and their own single machines) would have been needed to perform the functions of this one astounding apparatus.

South Carolina has been particularly hard hit by this shift. After NAFTA and later the opening of China to global trade, mills in Far East and Mexico were able to produce and ship textiles more cheaply, shuttering one mill after another. The ones that continued to operate replaced workers with autonomous computer run machines.

There’s a joke in cotton country (one of those not-really-so-funny jokes) that a modern factory employs only a man and a dog. The man is there to feed the dog and the dog is there to keep the man away from the machine.

Politicians give us faux facts and what Stephen Colbert calls “truthiness” about job creation, but the reality of manufacturing costs in the US underscores why the job crisis will be so difficult to solve.

If you grew up in one of the blue collar towns in the Mon Valley (and maybe some of you did), then there were often only two very distinct choices – stay in town and work in the mill or another blue-collar vocation, or go off to college and step up to a white-collar profession.

One choice was not necessarily better than the other. Unions guaranteed very good wages and benefits for steel workers and in some cases, their jobs were more secure.

How the people of Pittsburgh know the myriad ways this way of life has been shattered. In the town of Duquesne alone, virtually every child under 18 receives food assistance.

Not all factory workers are cut out to retrain as computer programmers. The decimation of manufacturing jobs has blown a hole into a culture of work that has always been and will always be a source of pride for Pittsburgh and other so- called rust belt cities in America.

But now, our society consumes more than we make. We are the world’s consumers, purchasing cheap foreign made goods like crack heads.  And the workers who once made our shirts and our cars and our TV sets and our steel – they’re at the dollar store, consuming what they can afford.  O workers, how can you stand it?

One of my newer Boomer-era friends here in Pittsburgh is one such Mon Valley native. He grew up in Monessen. His immigrant grandfather and his father worked in the Mill. So did most of his uncles and cousins. He worked factory jobs in the summer and was smart and clever and ambitious enough to earn scholarships, first to a New England boarding school and then to CMU.

He set out on a promising career in economics, but circumstances brought that to an end, and now, he works in Warehouse Logistics; a blue collar job in a warehouse on the site of the old Homestead Steel Works. Ironic, isn’t it? As he quipped, “Well at least I have a job…and (with a shrug) it’s familiar. Some of my former colleagues would not be able to handle the move from corner office to warehouse.” So, the dilemma exists in reverse, too.

Labor unions were meant to ensure job security, safe conditions and a living wage. Yet, even unions can do only so much to counterbalance rising production costs and the pressure on companies to produce goods at price points palatable to the American pocketbook. What role have we played, with our consumer cravings and our insistence on bargains, in this conundrum?

The undeniable hard facts about the extinction of thousands of blue collar jobs in the wake of technological advances casts a skeptical eye on both parties fiery rhetoric about job creation in the future.  Create jobs where? There are only so many small business to create a job or two, here and there. And how? Roll back production systems to an all-human workforce?

This is not tenable, and we’ve already learned during the recent financial meltdown and through the municipal challenges in Allegheny County and elsewhere, that our population cannot shift en masse over to finance or high tech or even education and health care and expect guaranteed lifelong, satisfying, sufficiently wage-earning livelihoods.

If you are invested in a mutual fund or own stocks, you undoubtedly want your investments to grow, to perform, right?  If the companies you own shares in do well, it is partially because they have balanced the needs of workers with the needs of consumers and the needs of investors. It’s a tricky economic and moral puzzle. If your mutual fund is performing again, great! But this, too, comes at a cost.

In my sphere, I tend to encounter people who like to work and who want to work; people who “submerge in the task.” Our attitudes towards work, towards the work ethic so vaunted in our culture, evolved from many social and religious sources including the Hebrew Scriptures, where we find in Leviticus the laws of righteousness regarding the wages of hired servants. And let’s not forget that the Bible also gives us the Sabbath  and sabbaticals– a time of rest from work.

Within the Buddhist eight fold path, we find the fifth precept or path of right livelihood. Buddhists interpret this as employment or business that is beneficial to the community as well as the individual. In Buddhism, all human activities must ultimately benefit the community. In Hinduism, Sangha or community is often paired with Seva, or service. Karma yoga is the yoga of work.

This led me to look at our own Seven Principles. I am heartened that only the first principle, dealing with the inherent worth and dignity of every person, is concerned with the individual. All others are oriented towards community. 

Our second principle – justice equity and compassion in human relations - represents the very bedrock of organized labor.

My colleague, the Rev. Ann Fox who has traveled extensively in India and the Near East reminds us that small enclaves of people have organized labor by engaging their religion’s teachings on right relations. One such organization is called Sarvodaya that has involved people in 5,000 villages in Sri Lanka. “ Sarva” is a Sanskrit word that means “all” or “everyone.” And “ udaya” connotes “awakening.” Put together, it means, “Everyone wakes up.” That’s a wake up call we could use here in the USA. 

The Sarvodaya communities have based their work philosophy on the Right Livelihood precept. They have added to this other teachings of the Buddha: metta, which means loving-kindness; karuna, which means compassion; and mudita, which means benefiting others. At their village meetings, these words are used constantly to make decisions about work and profits and the maximum benefit to the whole.

Our work, including our volunteer work gives us the greatest opportunity to put our beliefs into action to benefit the whole. Paul of Tarsus, the apostle, thought that work was a very important part of life. He was a tent-maker himself, even though he was a wealthy man and did not have to work. He was adamant that everyone should work and contribute to the community. The Dalai Lama counsels us all to learn a useful skill; did you know that he is an expert at fixing clocks and watches? (of course, his watch just says, “Now.” :)

Skilled or unskilled, workers like Luke and Maggie want their work to be fulfilling, too, to mean something, to be a right livelihood. When Thomas Jefferson alluded to “the pursuit of happiness” in the Declaration of Independence, what he had in mind was the inalienable right of individual citizens to choose their own religion, political affiliation, and their vocations.

And through these vocations, the individual finds a purpose, a grounding. Without it, work becomes drudgery, regardless of how grateful one is for the paycheck. As we read earlier, "The pitcher cries for water to carry and a person for work that is real."

What happens to a society, then, that can no longer promote or sustain the pursuit of vocation? What becomes of a citizenry that can no longer see the point of aspiring because the values of their society are so upside down and, as a result, the job prospects or even the path towards professional fulfillment, towards right livelihood, have become so murky? Well, it makes them sick; it breaks their hearts; it crushes their spirits. O Workers, how can you stand it?

Here at First Unitarian, more of us than not are in the position to ponder these questions of fulfillment in our vocations. We can choose and we can act. Even so, plugging into passion and purpose in our current work or finding work that deeply satisfies us requires opportunity.

Although our current labor statistics are grim, I believe we can strive to be optimistic and do our best to preserve and nurture the soul of work, the ideal of right livelihood and the value of right relations that labor unions have sought to provide and safeguard for our citizenry. And we must do some soul searching on where we fit in to this fragile dynamic as consumers and investors.

In his book The Prophet, Khalil Gibran tells this story:

“Then a ploughman said, Speak to us of Work.
 And he answered, saying: You work that you may keep pace with the earth and the soul of the earth.



For to be idle is to become a stranger unto the seasons, 

And to step out of life’s procession, that marches in majesty and proud submission towards the infinite.



When you work you are a flute through whose heart the whispering of the hours turns to music.

Always you have been told that work is a curse and labor a misfortune. But I say to you that when you work you fulfill a part of earth’s furthest dream, assigned to you when that dream was born,



And in keeping yourself with labor you are in truth, loving life.”

So may it be for us.

Amen.

© 2012 Rev. Robin Landerman Zucker. All rights reserved. Material may be quoted with proper attribution.

Open Your Arms if You Want to be Held - a sermon about Belovedness (with poetic interludes)

Open Your Arms If You Want To Be Held

Rev. Robin Landerman Zucker

First Unitarian Church of Pittsburgh

February 12, 2012

In our reading earlier, Kurt Vonnegut, Jr. gives us one of his quirky but poignant vignettes of a ragged street person named Mary Kathleen O'Looney who surrounds a long-lost love named Walter F. Starbuck in a busy city plaza. She encircles him with shopping bags and takes hold of his wrist. She will not lower her voice. " Now that I've found you, I'll never let you go. Look me in the eye, Walter," she says, "you used to tell me all the time  how much you loved me. Were you just lying to me?"

Vonnegut notes how this kind of melodrama always draws a crowd. And sure enough, people surround them in the plaza.  "Some people were crying," so the story goes. "I myself was about to cry," admits the narrator, who finally comes to recognize the bag lady as “one of the four women he had ever loved.”

"Hug her," said a woman in the crowd. "I did so," he writes. "I found myself embracing a bundle of dry twigs that was wrapped in rags. That was when I began to cry myself."

[I first heard this story in a sermon delivered by the Rev. Gary Smith many years ago and have never forgotten it] because Vonnegut's tale moves us and transports us into terrain laden with emotional land-mines. This touching episode of a "bundle of dry twigs wrapped in rags"  and the former lover she yearns to hug leads us to a few basic, but crucial, questions this morning.  In your heart of hearts, you'll each know how these questions pertain to your individual lives, if at all.

-  What do you  think "love" is?

- Are you willing to treat your beloveds AS beloved?

- When it is hardest to love, can you strive to love harder? 

- Will you allow fear and pride, anger and unhealthy behavior, to keep you from the hug that might be waiting just on the other side of these self-imposed barriers?

"Open your arms if you want to be held," the poet Rumi instructs us. What might it take for you to do this very healing thing with the ones you consider your nearest and dearest?

Those of us who minister can tell you about couples, gay and straight, who come in to talk with us joyfully about their upcoming weddings or services of union, as well as those who come to our offices to cry and tell us about the bumps in their partnerships.

[A colleague has noted that] “All of these meetings increase our awareness of three things: how deep and enduring is the human need for strong attachment; how deep and enduring is the human need to be affirmed in our own way, and how fragile are the bonds that keep us connected if both partners do not begin from an awareness of the crucial need to nurture the relationship as it unfolds.”

It should go without saying that in order to nurture a relationship, one needs to acknowledge that there is a relationship in first place. (the dreaded “R” word!) As humorist Dave Barry explains (clearly for a heterosexual audience), this nod isn’t always automatic, especially for his fellow males. 

Barry writes to his female readers: “Never assume that a guy understands that you and he have a relationship. The guy will not realize this on his own. You have to plant the idea in his brain by constantly making subtle references to it in your everyday conversation, such as:

-- "Roger, would you mind passing me a Sweet 'n' Low, inasmuch as we have a relationship?"

-- "Wake up, Roger! There's a prowler in the den and we have a relationship! You and I do, I mean. Not, the prowler and me!” 

-- "Good News, Roger! The doctor says we're going to have our fourth child, which will serve as yet another indication that we have a relationship!"

-- "Roger, although you forgot our anniversary again, I want you to know that we've had a wonderful 53 years of marriage together, which, by the way, clearly constitutes a relationship."

Barry’s dead-on humor does make us laugh, but the truth behind the wit might also skewers our hearts. Relationships are hard and they require vigilance. This truth is underscored by the multitude of books, tapes, workbooks, seminars, and counseling regimes designed to help us dig up our rosy illusions about relationships, and in their place, plant more firmly-rooted methods for loving others well in the real world.

Arguably,  the most famous prescription for  "love" appears in St. Paul's Letter to the Corinthians in the New Testament.  This idealized, but wise, view of love is, not surprisingly,  one of the most popular readings for wedding ceremonies.  Of course, if this love litany came with step-by-step, easy-to-follow instructions, we'd likely see a drop in the need for marital counseling, in domestic abuse cases, and in the demoralizing 48% divorce rate.

Many of us know these words well: " Love is patient; love is kind, love is not envious or boastful  or arrogant or rude. It does not insist on its own way; it is not irritable or resentful. It does not rejoice in wrongdoing, but rejoices in the truth. It bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things."  Gulp!

Although this definition appears hopelessly simplistic and unattainable, Paul gives us a love that is a revolutionary act!  And, like all revolutionary acts, this love of Paul's requires elbow grease and discipline. He never claims it will be a breeze; and many of us can attest that it isn't. There have been many-a-time when the last thing we’ve wanted to do is give or receive a hug.

Paul's love is an abiding love which recognizes that although affection and passion may ebb and flow, commitment and compassion can/should remain steadfast. It is spiritual union. It's a love for grown-ups.  It's a love that asks us to get out of the way.   In its most fearless form, it is a dangerous and unfashionable love.

INTERLUDE: While Love is Unfashionable -- Alice Walker

While love is unfashionable

let us live

unfashionably.

Seeing the world

a complex ball

in small hands;

love our blackest garment.

Let us be poor

in all but truth, and courage

handed down

by the old spirits.

Let us be intimate with

ancestral ghosts

and music

of the undead.

While love is dangerous

let us walk bareheaded

beside the great River.

Let us gather blossoms

under fire.

"Let us be poor in all but truth and courage," Alice Walker encourages us. "Love endures all things," writes Paul.  "Hug her," said a woman in the crowd. 

And I'm recalling now how this plea in Vonnegut's story comes after Mary Kathleen, desperate for acknowledgement, has cried out, "You used to tell me how much you loved me, Walter...were you just lying to me?" Her words spring from the page and pierce our hearts. How personally some of us may relate to her anguish.

Surely, not all relationships are salvageable no matter how hard we love or how bravely we keep at it. I realize that, especially given my work with people who are experiencing divorce, despite their best efforts. If you've struggled and been wounded in an unhealthy relationship that has ended,  my heart is with you.  If you are suffering now, my heart is with you.  If you are not in a relationship and are  yearning, my heart is with you.  Try to hear my words in a broader context of relationships in your life.

In certain cases, disengagement does equal self care and right relationship means no visible bond at all. Absolutely, especially if there has been abuse of any kind. 

There are times, though, when we do feel safe enough and optimistic enough to reinvest in our partnerships despite past disappointments or the inescapable challenges down the road.

For the couples who meet with me for marriage preparation, that means getting ahead of the curve, learning key communication skills,  and how to turn towards on another to develop and sustain real intimacy. In every wedding ceremony, I share my #1 motto for successful relationships: “Hug first, solve problems second.” I teach that to parents, too.

In a fable from the Hasidic tradition,  a discouraged man tells his Rabbi, "The feeling of love I have for my wife comes and goes. I used to love her more. What should I do?"

"Love her," responds the Rabbi.

"But you don't understand," pleads the man, "the feeling of love just isn't there sometimes."

"Yes, I understand," says the Rabbi, "if the feeling isn't there, that's a good reason to love her."

"But, how do you love when you don't love? When you're angry or resentful?"

"Love is a verb," answers the Rabbi. "It is choice. So, love her. Listen to her. Affirm her. Are you willing to do that?"

"I want to," admits the man, "but I am so afraid."

"O, Beloved, how numerous are my fears… I shall withstand all my fears as they arise within me, “ laments  the Psalmist. What is it we so often fear in our relationships? Loss of control? betrayal? being totally exposed to our partner? closing ourselves off to other prospects?  Are we afraid that we are essentially unlovable so we craft a script that validates our theory?

The way I see it, a vital  relationship is not meant to be like a ship safe in a harbor. There is danger built into it because a mature partnership  bars the easy way out or the quick fix. It must set out on the open sea. It demands change and compromise, ever deepening self-awareness and the capacity to accept difference, the ability to struggle, to endure, to grow together, and to forgive.

But our fears can hold us back, and surely, some of these fears are valid. Perhaps, we've wanted to hug or be hugged by our partner and we've been met repeatedly with a coolness that has closed down our hearts little by little. We've been punished instead of sheltered; we've withheld rather than abided (or visa versa).

If we are fortunate,  fate and circumstance break our hearts open and give us a kind of window to wisdom and courage,  and we become more compassionate and humble, caring and brave,  in spite of ourselves.

The author Anne Morrow Lindbergh (of Gifts form the Sea fame) gives us as eloquent a description of open-hearted partnership as we might find. This is somewhat ironic since  her autobiographies reveal the  cold marriage she endured with her  emotionally aloof, but publicly charming husband., CharlesLindbergh.

One can imagine that she ached for the graceful dance between partners, who, in her words, "moved to the same rhythm, creating a pattern together, and being invisibly nourished by it." "The joy of such a pattern," she wrote, "is not only the joy of creation or the joy of participation. It is also the joy of living in the moment...There is no place for the possessive clutch, the clinging arm, the heavy hand." Lindbergh is right on target. 

A loving hug given in trust and openness carries a different quality of connection than grab and clutch and cling.  It is, as the poet Marge Piercy defines it, "To Have Without Holding."

           

INTERLUDE: To Have Without Holding - Marge Piercy

Learning to love differently is hard,

love with the hands wide open,

love with the doors banging on the hinges,

the cupboard unlocked,

the wind  roaring and whimpering in the rooms

rustling the sheets and snapping the blinds

that thwack like rubber bands  in an open palm.

It hurts to thwart the reflexes

of grab, of clutch;

to love and let go again and again.

To love consciously,

concretely, constructively.

I can't do it, you say it's killing

me, but you thrive,

you glow on the street  like a neon raspberry,

You float and sail like a helium balloon.

To have and not to hold,

to love with minimized malice,

hunger and anger,  moment by moment balanced.

How well some of us know the pain of loving wide open. Especially if we've attempted it and had our hearts stomped on. Even so, loving wide open is the true path to the beloved, and it is do-able.  To stretch the muscles; to thwart the reflexes of grab, of clutch, of withdrawal; to love with minimized malice. Piercy summarizes the "how-to" portion of this equation well when she describes the process as one of loving "consciously, conscientiously, concretely, constructively."

What might these adverbs mean to you personally in your individual relationships? Loving consciously? loving concretely? loving constructively? Yes, it will be dangerous. Yes, it will be challenging. And, yes, it may lead to a depth of intimacy and union you've never experienced before or dreamt was possible.

INTERLUDE: The Sunrise Ruby -- Rumi

In the early morning hour,

just before dawn, lover and beloved wake

and take a drink of water.

She asks, "Do you love me or yourself more?

Really, tell the absolute truth."

He says, "There's nothing left of me.

I'm like a ruby held up to the sunrise.

Is it still a stone, or a world

made of redness?

It has no resistance to sunlight."

The ruby and the sunrise are one.

Be courageous and discipline yourself.

Completely become hearing and ear,

and wear this sun-ruby as an earring.

Work. Keep digging your well.

Don't think about getting off from work.

Water is there somewhere.

Submit to a daily practice.

Your loyalty to that

is a ring on the door.

Keep knocking, and the joy inside

will eventually open a window

and look out to see who's there.

The ruby and the sunrise are one," writes Rumi. "Be courageous and discipline yourself, submit to the daily practice.

[As the Rev. Thea Nietfeld suggests] Welcoming the sacred Beloved into human belovedness becomes a practice, a way to nurture spiritual growth. A commitment to love intentionally keeps us committed to a life of truth-telling.

And, rather than tightening our grip on our partners, we liberate them. In effect, we say, “I will trust you to love me honorably out of your own free will.” This is a great gift to give a partner; certainly more precious and enduring than flowers or chocolates.

Speaking of which…Valentines Days is Tuesday, in case you had not noticed. Wednesday morning will come all too soon.  FTD and Godiva will hate me for this but – here goes: 

Roses wilt; cultivate attentiveness. Valentines get tossed in memory boxes; try respect. Charm fades; develop humility.  Chocolates go right to your hips; focus on your heart. Romantic love puts stars in our eyes, yet only a clear vision of how we interact and how we might better interact with our partners will see us through the inevitable fog that descends on even the best relationships.

In her poem entitled, "The Hug," Tess Gallagher reminds us of what we (like disheveled Mary Kathleen O’Looney) often yearn for in our most intimate relationships,  but which we  sometimes push away or neglect to give through fear or pride or by not loving consciously.

"So I walk over to him," Tess Gallagher writes,

" and put my arms around him and

try to hug him like I mean it....

I put my head into his chest and snuggle in.

I lean into him.

I lean my blood and my wishes into him.

He stands for it.

This is his and he's starting to give it back so well

I know he's getting it.

This hug.

So truly, so tenderly we stop having arms..."

"Clearly, a little permission is a dangerous thing," Gallagher continues.

"But when you hug someone,

 you want it to be a masterpiece of connection,

the way the button on his coat

will leave the imprint of a planet in my cheek when I walk away.

When I try to find someplace to go back to."

So, if you can, give permission. Leave an imprint on another’s cheek. Love with the doors banging on their hinges. Glow on the street like a neon raspberry.  Acknowledge and honor the “relationship.” Gather blossoms under fire.

Open your arms if you want to be held.

"Hug her"..."Hug him"... says this woman in the crowd.

Amen.

Benediction: Shel Silverstein

I will not play at tug o'war.

I'd rather play at hug o'war,

Where everyone hugs

Instead of tugs,

Where everyone giggles

And rolls on the rug,

Where everyone kisses,

and everyone grins,

And everyone cuddles,

And everyone wins.

So may it be.

Amen.