Implosion?

"Something has gone terribly wrong with the American experiment. Our families are imploding. Our national debt is exploding. Experts on the left and the right warn we are on an unsustainable trajectory and urgently need to change course. Yet too many in Washington, academia, the media and even the church are in a 'business as usual' mode. As result, millions of America [sic] fear the ice is cracking under our feet." ~Joel Rosenberg

I agree. I really do. In the next few days I will be critical of this quote and many of its implications, but up front I want to go on record as agreeing with the statement as such. I agree that America is on an unsustainable trajectory, and in particular I agree that the escalating national debt is a contributing factor.

It may not be possible on Facebook, but I'd like to think we could carry on a civil discussion about the American experiment, the national debt, and other aspects of our economy. To do so we will have to look for principles on which we can agree, and then agree to respectfully disagree about the rest. That is why I started by agreeing that the national debt is a serious problem for our nation. We will disagree plenty on how and within what timeframe to bring the debt under control, but we can surely all agree that this needs to be done.

It will be tempting to bring up the presumptive presidential candidates and their political records and/or promises. Though I may succumb on occasion, I see little to be gained by this because it is little more than a quick way of eliciting antagonism, which is not what I want. Although much could also be said about comparing the current and previous administrations and their policies, it probably won't be possible to avoid such discussions entirely. For example, the Rosenberg quote was originally brought to my attention accompanied by a graphic implying that the present administration is to blame for the national debt. Eventually I will want to investigate this claim.

Where I want to start, however, is with the widening gap between the very rich and the poor. Inequality is now far higher than just 30 years ago. The top 1 percent today gets around 20 percent of the nation's income – twice what it did two decades ago. The top 0.1 percent's share has almost tripled. Disparities in wealth are even greater. The causes of these disparities and their remedies are open for discussion, but does anyone not think this is a serious issue? Click Like if you agree and please comment if you do not.

To forestall an argument I anticipate, I will not be suggesting that the answer to this inequality is to "steal from the rich and give to the poor." Some of my interlocutors may claim that this is my recommendation, but I will try to phrase my thoughts more clearly than that. I should also state that much of my thinking on this topic is based on the writings of economist Joseph E. Stiglitz, most recently in Politico. Here are the bullet points:

• If the economy is growing for everyone, inequality per se is not a problem. But in fact inequality is bad for growth.
• Those at the top aren't the true innovators – people who provided the intellectual foundations of the computer, for example, or the Internet.
• Much of the top-most wealth comes from successful "rent seeking" (income derived from owning an asset, rather than from effort).
• "Rent seeking" attempts to garner a larger share of the economic pie, rather than making the pie larger.
• The U.S. has more inequality than any of the other advanced industrial countries in which similar market forces are at play.
• Laws and regulations in the U.S. shape markets in ways that enrich the top – but don't necessarily enhance growth and efficiency.

If any of my friends disagree with one or more of these points, I would love to hear from you.

Invitation and Warning

At present I'm still up to my neck (my eyeballs, actually) with an EMR project at work, so I don't have much extra time to devote to blogging or to Facebook. But today is Sunday. My grandson, Ian, spent the night with me last night, and my daughter, Rachel, and I took him to church with us this morning (Debby being out of town). This afternoon is a time for relaxation and reflecting on things that are important.

It happens that I have been reading The Inquisition of Climate Science by James Lawrence Powell. In a way I am learning nothing new, because I have been convinced that global warming is real and that human activity (specifically the burning of fossil fuels) is by far the predominant cause since long before I put together the list of links about the Science of Global Warming in August, 2011. In other words, Powell did not need to persuade me of the truth of climate change (because I was already persuaded), but what Powell's book has done is help me better understand the forces arrayed against us, forces that are doing everything they can to muddy the waters and convince the populace that there is nothing to this threat. This, my friends, makes it a moral issue.

Then this morning I read a column, On Climate Change, Money Trumps Common Sense, by Bill Moyers, a journalist whom I have long admired. In this article Moyers quotes a publication of the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration publication (via the Washington Post) revealing that the concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere of Barrow, Alaska, reached 400 parts per million (ppm) this spring. This may not be all that surprising, but it is alarming nonetheless.

It is time to wake up, friends, long past time. So here is an invitation and a warning. The invitation is this. Please engage me in discussion. I will be forthright, but I will not attack you personally, nor will I belittle you. In fact, if you think I am overlooking important information, I am happy to read and study anything you bring to my attention. But please engage me. This is too important not to discuss civilly and intelligently. Engage me here on this blog; engage me on Facebook; engage me by email.

The warning is this. From here forward, I no longer view discussions of climate change and global warming as political (and therefore to be avoided as far as possible). I now view this topic as one with moral and spiritual implications to be discussed openly and often. If this makes you uncomfortable, please feel free to "un-friend" me or at least "unsubscribe". (I won't be not be offended and probably won't even know.)

The Gayatri Mantra: A Paraphrase

Strictly speaking "Gaytri mantra" refers to a class of mantras in Vedic metre having three Padas of 8 syllables each, but this particular mantra is the best known so it is called The Gayatri Mantra. Also strictly speaking, therefore, this mantra consists of just three lines, but it is universally preceded by "The Great Utterance" making four lines in all.

Devanagari

ॐ भूर भुवः स्वः ।
तत् सवितुर्वरेण्यं ।
भर्गो देवस्य धीमहि ।
धियो यो नः प्रचोदयात् ॥

The Great Utterance

Om ( ॐ ) ( औम् औँ )

Whole books have been written about this word/syllable/symbol, and the entire Mundakopanisad Upanisad is devoted to its explanation and importance in Hindu (or vedic) thought. It has been referred to as "the name of God, the sound of the Universe, the primordial sound," and it is also known as the Seed Mantra because it contains the seed for all other mantras within itself. When taken letter by letter, A-U-M represents the divine energy (Shakti) united in its three elementary aspects: Bhrahma Shakti (creation), Vishnu Shakti (preservation) and Shiva Shakti (liberation). Aum corresponds to the crown chakra

Looking at the symbol itself, start with the dot in the upper right. What is that? Well, that is "That!" The dot stands for Ultimate Reality, the Essence of All, The Ground of Being. It also represents a state of consciousness in which all comes to rest, all is silent. It is the state of bliss, the state to which we aspire, the aim of all spiritual activity. Immediately below the dot is a semi-circle that represents illusion, distractions, selfishness, sin. It is such illusion that prevents us from reaching the state of bliss.

The lower curve on the left represents the philosophical notion of Truth, or objective experience, what we can smell, taste, touch, hear, and see. This is the Physical Dimension of experience. The top curve under the illusion semi-circle (also at left) represents the philosophical notion of Beauty, or subjective experience, what we experience on the inside. This is the Spiritual Dimension of experience. To the right of these intersecting curves is a more tortuous curve representing the philosophical notion of Goodness. This is sometimes called the inter-subjective experience. It may also be called the Emotional (or mental) Dimension of experience. Each curve has two ends, outer and inner. Taken together we choose to call these Mystery. Since Mystery is the source of all creation, the life force of procreative energy, and the creative spark within each of us, we further use the term Fountain of Mystery.

These three curves also represent three aspects of prayer. The top curve signifies Praise, the lower curve, Petition, and the right, Meditation. In terms of sensuality, these curves could also indicate pleasure, desire, and awareness respectively.

bhur भूर   bhuvah भुवः   svah स्वः

These three words in the Great Utterance must be considered together. They represent three dimensions of experience in much the same way as the three curves of the Om symbol.

bhur भूर	bhuvah भुवः	svah स्वः
earth	sky	heavens
coming	going	balance of life
past	present	future
physical	emotional	spiritual
biological	mental	mystical
objective	inter-subjective	subjective
horizontal	depth	vertical
Ahh	Uoo	Mmm
Bhrahma	Vishnu	Shiva
gross	subtle	causal
waking	dreaming	sleeping
creation	preservation	liberation
desire	awareness	bliss
truth	goodness	beauty

 

Om. In truth, goodness, and beauty

Praise Line

tat ( तत् s.1)

This is a name for the divine, with emphasis on Ultimate Reality, Mystery. Literally it means "that One." We may think of this word as referring to the dot in the Om symbol.

savitur ( सवितुर् s.2-4)

This is a name for the divine, with emphasis on "source" or "creation." The literal meaning is "sunlight." Savitur is the creative source of the universe, the procreative source of evolutionary advance (the life-force), and it is the source of the creative spark in each of us. Because it is an ongoing continuous source, we call it the Fountain of Mystery. The Praise Line itself is represented by the upper curve in the symbol, but Savitar (the Fountain of Mystery) is represented by all three curves taken together.

varenyam ( वरेण्यं s.5-8)

This word means "worthy of adoration, praise, or worship". The literal meaning may be "desirable" or "excellent," "the best".

The Fountain of Mystery invites our praise.

Meditation Line

bhargo ( भर्गो s.1-2)

Literally means "radiant light", but also means "purifying radiance" or "pure light." It is also translated "destroyer of sins." This illumination evaporates the thick fog of illusion, trivializes distractions into disappearance, and purifies us of sin.

devasya ( देवस्य s.3-5)

This is another name for the divine, with emphasis on qualities or attributes of the divine. Thus it refers to the multi-faceted nature of our experience of Mystery. Weaving these facets or threads together is Tantra.

dhimahi ( धीमहि s.6-8)

This is a verb meaning to meditate or to focus the mind. Here it means to focus on Mystery or some aspect of Mystery. Tantric meditations weave together the many facets of Mystery. They also use Mantra to reveal Tattva.

Purify us through these Tantric meditations.

Petition Line

dhiyo ( धियो s.1-2)

"The intellect" or the "mind," thoughts.

yo ( यो s.3)

This is a pronoun, most likely referring back to Mystery as its antecedent.

nah ( नः s.4)

This word is an enclitic personal pronoun meaning "our" and possibly emphasizing our oneness.

Also, note that( योनी ) is yoni – "our source."

prachodayat ( प्रचोदयात् s.5-8)

Literally "let it push" or "let it inspire," this word can also mean "to enlighten".

And inspire our minds (to know) that we are One.

Fall Festival Translation

Om — In truth, goodness, and beauty
The Fountain of Mystery invites our praise.
Purify us through these Tantric meditations
And inspire our minds that we are One.

Extended Paraphrase

When there was nothing,
Mystery said, "AUM."
By this, Mystery became manifest;
Then there was something rather than nothing.

The vibration of "A·U·M" represents the divine energy of Mystery
In creation, in preservation, and in liberation,
As described by the divine attributes of
Truth, Goodness, and Beauty.
And that was 'That' ( तत् ).

'That' One,
Or the Fountain of Mystery,
Is the Creative Source of everything:
Mystery is the source of the created Universe.
Mystery is the procreative source of Life.
Mystery is the source of our own creativity.

The Fountain of Mystery, this Source of All,
Invites our praise and worship.
Therefore, this is our petition:
Purify our thoughts and rid us of distractions;
Inspire us through these meditations;
Enlighten us to the reality that in Mystery we are One.

Tantra — Tattva and Mantra

तत्त्व	tattva	त	त ्त्	व	essence (thatness)
तन्त्र	tantra	त	न्त्	र	woven, continuum
मन्त्र	mantra	म	न्त्	र	prayer or hymn

Obamacare and the Supreme Court

On Monday the Supreme Court will begin hearing three days of oral arguments over President Barack Obama’s health care overhaul, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. Opponents say the law is unconstitutional; their chief argument is that Congress does not have the power to force unwilling Americans to buy health insurance or pay a fine. If the Court rules that the health insurance mandate is unconstitutional, they will decide whether the rest of the act can take effect. They will also hear arguments over whether the law goes too far in coercing states to expand the federal-state Medicaid program for low-income people. It is not clear to me whether this last question is related to the first (the mandate issue) or is separate.

With regard to the health insurance mandate, the justices may strike down the provision as unconstitutional, they may decide that the mandate falls within the powers granted to Congress by the commerce clause of the Constitution and allow it to stand, or they may dismiss the case without a binding ruling by deciding that the issue is premature, since penalties have not yet been paid (and will not be levied until 2015). Although the Court may decide these issues at any time, they likely will not produce a decision until June.

For the record, I believe that the health insurance mandate is both constitutional and good for healthcare. Provisions in this law have already benefited many individuals and will benefit many more in years to come.

But what if the Supreme Court disagrees with me and decides the individual mandate is unconstitutional? Would this totally put an end to the health care reforms we have passed in the last three years?

Absolutely not.

First, the Affordable Care Act has started moving our country's health system away from one that pays for volume and toward one that pays for value. If the Supreme Court were to strike down the entire act (as opposed to just the individual mandate), it would slow this change in direction no doubt, but it cannot reverse it.

Second, the health-care industry had been moving toward value-based payments even before health reform passed. The Affordable Care Act played an important role by signallying that the federal government is also headed in that direction, but this movement will continue regardless of the Supreme Court decision. The insurance companies are all for it.

Third, last year, authorized by the Affordable Care Act, the Obama administration announced a $500 million program called Partnership for Patients aimed at reducing hospital-acquired infections, errors and other preventable complications. The act also requires Medicare to begin posting online each hospital’s rate of certain medical errors and infections, and to cut payments to hospitals with the highest rates. Consequently, hospitals across the country are working to reduce preventable hospital errors. The Supreme Court decision will not cause anyone to rescind this effort.

Fourth, overturning the law would release insurers from the federal rule regarding expanded coverage (such as for young adults). But (1) nearly all states, which regulate many forms of private insurance, have already codified the young-adult rule at the state level, and (2) many insurance companies would now find it unpalatable to revert back to their original policies.

Bottom line. I hope the Supreme Court will uphold the constitutionality of the health insurance mandate. If they strike it down, I hope they will leave the rest of the Affordable Care Act intact. But even if they nullify Obamacare entirely, Obamacare has already helped to bring about the most significant improvements in our health care system in decades. The Supreme Court may be able to slow this advancement with a wrong decision, but it will not be able to turn back the clock.

Why I care.

And why I hope you will too.

Increasingly I find myself caring about things beyond my immediate control, and caring more deeply about each one. Maybe it is because I have entered what I consider to be the last third of my life. Maybe it is because the Internet has made me aware of more aspects of the world and more details about each area. Maybe I am simply part of a broader, deeper movement toward greater concern and compassion. I don't always know why, but I just know I care.

Yet what difference does it make? The problem with caring about something I can't control is that I don't know what to do about it. Is there anything I can do about it? Well, it turns out that often there is plenty. It is true that by myself I can do little, but when I sign a petition along with tens of thousands of others, it can make a big difference. I have seen it happen, more than once. When I make just two phone calls to my senators' offices along with hundreds of others, the senators may change their minds on a bill. I actually saw this happen, too. Every time I donate just $5 to an organization that uses these funds wisely, it combines with small gifts from thousands of others to make a real and tangible difference in someone's life.

In my opinion, however, the biggest difference any of us can make is to raise the level of awareness of others around us. And this is where you come in. I am not trying to talk you into donating money, or making phone calls, or even signing petitions. All I am trying to do is raise your awareness of the issues that have captured my attention and concern. I'm only asking you to think about it. If a topic touches you, you may want to "Like" or "Comment", and for the things you really care about too, you are invited to "Share".

But what if you disagree with me on something? There are plenty of issues where the problem may be clear, but the answers controversial. I invite you to share your views respectfully, and I will do the same. What about concerns I have never heard of? I invite you to post about the causes you hold dear to your heart. I will do my best to respond to you as I would have you respond to me.

Recently I decided to pick out a few of the web sites that represent the issues I have come to care most about. Then I created a page with annotated links to each of these sites: donnal on the Internet.

Blessings upon you.

Another War, Really?

I am no policy wonk, especially foreign policy, but I am concerned about the recent escalation of saber rattling toward Iran. War should always be the last resort. A hardline stance toward Iran may be appropriate (or may not), but Senate Resolution 380 if adopted could make military conflict more likely.

• The war in Iraq has cost the U.S. $100 billion a year, more than $800 billion total. How can our economy afford a war with Iran?
• The U.S. has thousands of nuclear weapons, Israel hundreds. Why are we assuming that suddenly, deterrence will not work with Iran anymore? Military leaders see no such threat.
• What are the views of the Iranian people in regards to a potential war and the current sanctions? Is this path helping us win or lose hearts and minds in Iran?
• Given the controversy over our intelligence on Iraq, how are we factoring in and addressing the uncertainty of intelligence on Iran's nuclear program?
• Why are many ignoring intelligence reports that see no move by Iran to build a nuclear bomb?
• Could it be that the increasingly bellicose and confrontational approach of the West actually increase Tehran's desire for nuclear deterrence?
• A tense exchange is currently playing out in public between the Netanyahu government and the U.S. military. What lies behind the starkly diverging views of the Netanyahu government and the U.S. military on Iran?
• My worry has long been the idea of terrorists getting material to make "dirty bombs" that could be smuggled into Israel or the U.S. It is much more likely, however, that this material would come from Russia or Pakistan than from Iran.
• I am no expert in Middle East policy, but these are a few reasons I see to lower the rhetoric and avoid war with Iran.

(Thoughts derived from an article in the Huffington Post.)

See also donnal.net

Digging Deeper Again

The biggest problem with digging deeper for me is that it takes time. That is what digging deeper means, taking the time to seek out new information, organize the material, and work to articulate the findings. Recently I have had a number of other projects to work on (such as refurbishing donnal.net), so I have not been doing much digging. At least for a few posts, I hope to change this.