Since it is the high point of the year this weekend, Eurovision Song Contest 2023, in Liverpool, UK, I decided to make more lighthearted post this time. I have been planning for this for long time, and ESC just gave me a good reason to actualize it now. I will post this after we will know the results, and finish the last details.
Here I'm going to take a look at musical influences in my life. My taste is very broad, from some classical music to metal, from electric pop to rock. I don't care what genre it is, I just know if I like it, and I'm proud that at my age I'm not stuck with nostalgia: I still always try to find something new. I try to keep this short, and only focus on the most essential, so remember it's a small proportion of wide variety. You can check my YouTube Channel (see the sidebar), and my playlists for more.
So, as a child my first musical interest was Elvis Presley. I'm almost ashamed to admit that, but I didn't know anything yet. But soon, as a teen of the 1980's, I became a fan of Hanoi Rocks - Finland's first international success story. They never quite made it, because at the critical moment their drummer died in car crash on tour in the USA 1984, in a car driven by Vince Neil of Motley Crue. But they still had a huge influence on other bands of an era, and gathered a cult following. Their singer, Michael Monroe, has continued on successful international solo career, and last year he celebrated his 60th birthday with huge concert in Helsinki, where original line up of Hanoi Rocks also performed. People came to see it from abroad too. To be honest, I don't really listen to his music nowadays, but as 53 years old myself, I find him very inspiring person: He can still ROCK, and he has always dared to be himself! (And still looks amazing!) He is the living legend, and very much liked in Finland. Following sample I chose from their 1983 album, "Back to Mystery City":
Hanoi Rocks: "Until I get you" live 1983
Michael Monroe 60th Birthday Bash 23.9.2022: Hanoi Rocks - Tragedy
Update 13.6.23: I just have to add this global news few days ago; Michael finally met Vince Neil on June 2023 at festival in Finland, and he himself wrote: "One of the most important moments of my life was meeting Vince Neil for the first time last night. Razzle [Nicholas "Razzle" Dingley] always wanted us to meet as he thought 'us singers' were a lot alike. Under different circumstances both bands probably would've ended up as good friends, but fate had other plans... Thank you for your time, Vince. We didn't say much but your eyes told me more than 1000 words ever could. And your singing was great at the show. Nice to finally see you guys live!" - That's Michael, that's the sort of guy he is!
Vince Neil and Michael Monroe
Of course in 1980's I listened to all sorts of music, including international top artists and bands, like Duran Duran, Culture Club, Eurythmics... (God, I'm old! 😄) Music, along with some movies and Tv-shows, was the bright side of that era to me; in other aspects my life was very depressing.
Also, I remember first time watching Eurovision Song Contest in the 1980's, but it was quite different back then: so rigid and boring. Although, I don't think there is any doubt that ABBA is the most successful winner of the contest ever, and that was already in the 70's! (Title of this post is a name of one of their songs, you know.)
I didn't watch it every year. Nowadays it is THE ULTIMATE QUEER SHOW! (Or "Gay Paralympics", as someone said.) Live performance, costumes, dancers, lights, pyro... all that is important as well. It is so unpredictable: sometimes the winner is very artsy (and I don't really like that kind), sometimes it is more campy, and everything in between. That's diversity! You never know what people will like this year. It's never "the same old". Juries in each country give their points first in Grand Final, but public vote often changes everything. I have been watching ESC regularly only after I met my husband in 2016, because he is a big fan!
For a while in the 1990's, when I had my "spiritual awakening", so to speak, I listened to a lot of New Age music, but soon there was a short period when I only listened to classical music, and that was because I was a member of cult, and they said popular music is bad for you ("rock is satanic", and all that shit... but New Age music was considered bad as well).
When I had to bury my late partner, and later my mother, it was my wish that at both funerals they played Albinoni's Adagio in G minor (which in fact was not composed by Albinoni) for opening, and J.S. Bach's "Jesu, Joy of man's desiring" BMW 147 for closing. First, melancholic tunes in the beginning, and then almost hopeful tone in the end. That's life.
When I started to listen to pop and rock in the 1990's again, after meeting my late partner, and leaving that cult, there was a lot of excellent music on that decade, as we all know. The one song that summarizes all that, is the world wide hit from Finland, Sandstorm by Darude. Not long ago I visited with my husband, who was born in 1991, a museum exhibition of the 1990's, and this was the song they played there:
Darude: Sandstorm (1999)
In 2001, Finnish world-famous rock band, The Rasmus, published their album Into, and I was very much into it. I saw them live many times. However, the next album didn't impress me that much, they changed their style to darker, and my enthusiasm faded. Last year they represented Finland in ESC, but didn't reach very high.
The Rasmus: F-F-F-Falling (2001)
And then the moment came when Finland finally won ESC in 2006, with monster band Lordi and their song, "Hard Rock Hallelujah": certainly one of the most memorable acts in the history of ESC until this day:
Lordi: Hard Rock Hallelujah at ESC 2006
In 2019 Hatari represented Iceland with their song, Hatrid mun sigra ("hate will prevail"), and suddenly I became a FAN. You can like many kinds of music, but being a true fan is rare, to me anyway; I would say it's almost like a religious experience. I saw them on gig in Helsinki that same year, and again after Covid in 2022. On March 2023 we were told that band's screamer, Matthias, is leaving. It was very sad news. How could they continue without him? I made a poster of one photo taken in Helsinki in remembrance. My unpopular opinion, which I haven't dared to put into words before this, is that I could sense on October 2022 that something was different: They performed very well, and quality of the sound was much better than the last time, but some chemistry, vibe, energy... whatever... that I felt in 2019 was lacking. They already knew about Matthias, and he soon told in interview that he didn't enjoy performing anymore.
This is the picture I made a poster of: Klemens and Matthias (Einar in drums in the background) performing "Soda Ritual".
I just loved the fact that they sing in their native tongue! See: Hatari translations. They don't have a single song I wouldn't like.
Hatari: Hatrid mun sigra at ESC 2019
Amazingly enough, ESC 2023 introduced me a new band I immediately started to follow: Lord of the Lostfrom Germany! They already have a long history and many albums. I have been aware of them, but never payed attention. This is the power of ESC! Yes, I can say I am a fan now: Can't wait to see them live! Hatari and Lord of the Lost are very different, but there is one common word to describe their music, and that is "industrial", whatever that means...
Lord of the Lost: Blood & Glitter
This year at ESC the international hype around Finland's Käärijä has been massive. Even in my hometown they lighted the centre with green lights in support of him. I personally remained quite neutral. It's one song. Who had heard of Käärijä even in Finland before this? Of course I sincerely hoped Finland would win, it would be about time to redo it. I supported Germany and voted for them (this year it's been made possible to vote all around the world, outside of ESC participants too - you can't vote for your own country obviously, unless you are located in some other country). Lord of the Lost - who have connections to Finland - even made a cover of Käärijä's song in Finnish, and in my opinion it's better than the original (go find it on YouTube!). For the show I wore red instead of green, and put a golden glitter on my face. But for the first time in my life I bought a bottle of real Champagne... and I'm not going to waste it by pouring it on myself, as in lyrics of Cha Cha Cha (see them in English). Unfortunately, Germany was the last; still, it was a gain for myself (new favorite band; So, gain for them as well - new fans!). Nevertheless, Käärijä came second; Loreen from Sweden won. This time it was Jury points that made a difference. That was our second best place ever! But I know many people in Finland will think that was a loss; that's just the nature of this nation. But Käärijä has ascended to Eurovision hall of fame forever! Anyway, it will take a long, long time for us to beat this result, I'm afraid not in my lifetime, and that's why I am a little disappointed. It was very contradictory experience, and hopefully I will recover by next year, but meanwhile I feel like I don't even want to hear about ESC!
One week later (21.5.2023): I just have to add that now that we have seen Käärijä breaking all the records, I can only be proud of him, and proud of being Finn! He did win... hearts of people. 💚💚💚
Käärijä: Cha Cha Cha
If I should pick up one artist singing in Finnish whom I really like, that's easy: It is Olavi Uusivirta, singer - song writer, and actor. This song is quite old already (2006), but it's very touching; Hautalaulu ("Gravesong"). See lyrics in English. He's got more rocking tunes too. It's a shame I am yet to see him live; his live performances are praised.
Olavi Uusivirta: Hautalaulu
American Song Contest in 2022 was based on Eurovision Song Contest. It was shown on Finnish television as well, but I didn't watch it: it's not the same at all! I like to watch videos where Americans react to European things, and ESC is definitely one of my favorite subjects!
But not all Americans are unaware of ESC: On YouTube I follow American drag queen Maxxy Rainbow, who is a big fan of ESC: he/she was in Italy last year, and now in Liverpool. I just love how excited and emotional he/she is about everything! That's an example of real ESC fan for all of us! Check out his/her YouTube Channel: Maxxy Rainbow ESC.
Personally, I'm not musical at all. One time in my youth I have sung Karaoke, and that was also the last time ever, I promise! However, to include Buddhism/spirituality in this post, Tina Turner has said:
"Nam-myoho-renge-kyo is a song. In the Soka Gakkai tradition we are taught how to sing it. It is a sound and a rhythm and it touches a place inside you. That place we try to reach is the subconscious mind. I believe that it is the highest place and, if you communicate with it, that is when you receive information on what to do. Singing a song can make you cry. Singing a song can make you happy. That’s spirit—the spirit inside of you."
It is true, it actually feels like singing. If I start chanting after I have listened to music I like, I feel like that same energy music gave me, is coming forth from myself, it is uniting two experiences following one another as one. In 2020 Daimoku (Nam-myoho-renge-kyo) was part of Azerbaijan's Eurovision entry, Cleopatra. My husband was especially excited to point out this fact to me, and he still reminds me of it at times! Somehow it validated my practice for him, so I'm glad about the song, even if it feels a little forced and random how mantra is included, to add some mystical vibe. Sadly, that was the year contest was cancelled because of Pandemic.
I came across this video, Finnish Theosophist and Rosicrucian Antti Savinainen (who has Ph.D. in physics) is being interviewed by Quest Magazine editor Richard Smoley from American Theosophical Society. Topics include Pekka Ervast, his form of esoteric Christianity, and spiritual interpretation of Kalevala.
My link lists on the sidebar contain Pekka Ervast and Kalevala, for those who want to find out more. Also, I have personally translated many years ago some brief writings by Pekka Ervast for this blog:
I could conclude that the benefit of Theosophical movement was to bring Eastern philosophy for wider audience in the West. Yet its downside was to confuse the ideas of Buddhism and Hinduism, and claim that "these two mean the same." It is not true.
Just like my (esoteric) Christian friend - the one I wrote about in previous post - recently told me, he had heard a young Rosicrucian say that morals is the one thing uniting the world religions. However, it doesn't matter what someone said, everyone has their own perspective, and morals is precisely the one thing that separates me and my friend. It's never been the point for me. I don't think it's even necessary to find uniting factors in religions. It is simply humanity that unites us, and a religion in itself is very human thing.
In my Finnish blog I often refer to one particular friend of mine, a straight male and Christian. I have known him for 20 years, and he has always been the one I often have a hard time with. Always. Only him and no one else. So, we've had conflicts over the years, nothing has really changed in that respect, but since I left Christianity, it particularly seems to trouble him, and that in turn is a pain in my neck. Things have escalated really bad this time, and it's been a year already! About year ago, he sent me an e-mail, a long list of questions. First, let me just say that as a Christian, he is an esotericist, who believes in reincarnation (just like I was too); Yet, simultaneously, he is morally extremely conservative (as much as I am liberal). Those two things sometimes seem to be in conflict, and it's not just my opinion: I can see it in his personality, and how it's affecting him. He has actually lost relationships among more traditional Christians in the past, because of his personal beliefs. (And I'm not saying there aren't esoteric movements, which are very conservative: I once belonged to one myself. But usually they are more open, accepting, and free, than many mainstream Christian denominations.)
Have you replaced one religion with another?
When I came to Christianity, I actually consciously replaced one religion (Gnosticism) with another (my previous post, New Revelations, touches that briefly). Over 10 years later, I renounced Christianity, and when my partner suddenly died, I had no religion at all. There was nothing to be replaced. Then I awakened to Buddhism through inner, mystical experience, and as I studied these things I realized, this is how I'm pretty much already thinking.
Finnish Lutheran Vicar, Voitto Viro - bold seeker for truth - wrote in the 1970's: "It is right to accept this attitude: If you show me the truth, that will convince my spirit with greater absoluteness than the truth lightened by Jesus, alright then: My spirit binds me to be loyal to that truth, which bestows the deepest freedom."
I have been wondering why we no longer talk about these things, but when I was pondering his questions, I already began to get tired.
He has repeatedly said that I "used to read and study a lot", but apparently he thinks I don't anymore, as I read and study different things. And he can't even see that himself. He thinks he's only praising me for my past, when at the same time he's playing down (or completely ignoring) my present. I never exclusively studied Christianity, and now that I'm through with that, it seems superficial that it would matter if you believe in certain claims or not. It's only bookish.
To talk about "deep stuff" for the sake of talking, that's superficial too. He once said he no longer knows what I believe in. Why should he? For me, faith is a private matter. It's hard for me to share my deepest thoughts with anyone, because I feel nobody can understand. Nobody has walked the same path as I have. And why talk about doctrinal questions on theoretical level in the first place? Isn't it a question of life?! The most relevant can never be expressed in words, or shared with anyone: You have to experience that by yourself, and experience is individual for everyone. Isn't it a main point to accept one another, no matter what. It's not supposed to be a competition, where the point is to defeat another one with clever arguments.
Understandably, I feel frustrated when asked questions I have already answered thoroughly in my blogs. I express myself best in writing, I'm not a good speaker, so I rather don't discuss these things with anyone. I have also touched the problem I see we always have had: When I try to form my ideas of religion - or "spirituality" - into words, it's like writing a poem. But often I see that for him it is like solving a mathematical problem: completely different approach, as if we spoke two different languages. He has told me how important science and especially mathematics has been to him, even as a seeker for truth on the spiritual path. For me, I think art is closer connection to Spirit. So, our greatest difference is not a content of thought, but the whole process how we come to our conclusions. I have always trusted more in my heart, even though I do highly value persons who read a lot, and especially diversely (and he's not one of them!). But it's not enough. Knowledge you learn from a book is not your own, it's borrowed, until you have experience of it (Gnosis). If you say you know something of spirituality, based on your experience, another person can have equally strong experience, that led them to completely different conclusions. Then it only sounds arrogant to emphasize your own knowledge. Many Christian believers act like that, and it makes repulsive impression. "Truth" is very narrow and small if it is some doctrine or idea included in specific religion.
Seen afterwards, I have walked my way very consistently, step by step: Obviously, I haven't seen at the moment where it was taking me, but every phase was necessary for me, and only for me. There was providence all along. In my perspective and experience, it is odd if a person does not change, and their world view does not seemingly evolve. It is stagnation.
We have never agreed on many things, to think anything else is just illusion. I have learnt long time ago what I can't say to him, and avoided those things. It is also true that we used to have a connection, but it was nothing said, it was shared spiritual practice that united us. Silence speaks louder than words: words can only separate, silence is unifying. It was natural when we had a formal "group" for few years. We gathered together on regular basis, to pray and meditate. It is more difficult when we meet informally. I have tried to make it clear that if you want to discuss deeply, you should also practice/quiet/meditate for counterbalance. Maybe it's just me who has a need for that.
I don't think it's wrong that I'd rather talk about these things with someone like-minded - that is, another Nichiren Buddhist - so that we could compare our experiences, and support one another, maybe even practice together. However, nobody's mind is exactly like mine: As an independent practitioner, I have a freedom of choice. Buddhism, just like Christianity, is not one gray monolith. Nichiren Buddhism is a kind of its own, and even among that there are several distinguished schools. Practice is one unifying factor. I couldn't have converted to Buddhism for example in its Theravada form. Added to that, I have my whole spiritual history behind me (see the introduction page of this blog).
Have you often gone through a crisis, that caused your view to change?
Yes and no. Some crisis may have forced me to change, and it has been a long and painful process, but also sudden inner experience may have changed everything all at once: This is how I became a Buddhist. I was "reborn", so to speak. The most essential thing has never changed, it has only become strengthened and cleared: There is something precious within, "Christ in us", Buddha Nature.
Are you a Buddhist?
Why this question? How is it not clear to him? I try to think he probably didn't mean it that way, but repeatedly I have a feeling as if he's questioning me. That's another reason why I don't like to talk about these things especially with him. Maybe it's because he tries to analyze everything. I base everything on experience, reasoning is secondary.
What do you think about NDE? (Near-Death Experience)
I have told him my opinion sometimes. For whatever reason, NDE is very important for him. Maybe he should live a little first. I think it is real per se, yes, and there are a lot of universal characteristics about it, but also characteristics that arise from person's own mind. Tibetan Book of the Dead speaks about this. I always get suspicious the more specific these stories are; Either the Afterlife is described resembling this world, in materialistic manner, or people are meeting entities from their religious sphere, like Jesus. I think death has a lot in common with dreaming, it's not without reason these two have been parallelled in the old days. But it's not meaningful to focus on Afterlife in this life. And to read others' experiences is not the same as to experience it. Already as a child in the 1980's I read about Raymond Moody's research, and before heart surgery in 2019, I did read a book by Anita Moorjani, and that one I liked: especially because she does not come from Western, Christian culture, but Indian Hindu family, and was raised in Hong Kong. Her experience lacked characteristics I find suspicious.
Do you think Jesus was a historical person?
No serious researcher doubts the historicity of Jesus, neither do I. It doesn't mean more than that. I only want to know Jesus the Man. Like Osho said: "Because you are in the situation of being a Jesus; Christ is just a dream." Christians worship mythical Christ, and don't listen to Jesus. Nevertheless, there is indeed MysticalChrist, and it is within each and every one of us, call it by whatever name; That's the only Christ St. Paul in his epistles is pointing at.
Is the truth a subjective matter to you?
As Wikipedia article explains, "truth" is not as self-explanatory idea as my friend seems to think. It's very vague concept. I have never understood how casually he uses it, apparently presuming that everyone else will understand it the same way he does.
Have you always been personally for some orientation or something else?
I don't understand his question. I have always fully been what I have been. That's why change may be painful, even if they are birth pains.
Is religion or any worldview only a collection of subjective opinions you can change completely?
Views are man-made. Buddhism does not plead for Divine origin. In fact, I find something that resonates with myself in thoughts of Protagoras, a Greek philosopher (490-420 BCE). See Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Emphasis on Something. Don't take it to mean too much; I haven't profoundly digged into his philosophy.
What does science mean to you? Is your idea of man compatible with modern science? What about the world view?
I have not especially made myself familiar with science. Does the earth rotate the sun? If he wants to know if I am materialist, then no. That's the short answer.
Have you preserved anything from Christianity?
Not consciously. But everything I have ever been, is somehow always with me. You can not get rid of it completely.
What about the things Christianity and Buddhism agree on? I have been glad about the commandments. They are so similar to Christianity. Do you live according to Buddhist commandments/morals/precepts?
This is finally a topic of great importance. There are no commandments in Buddhism. It's not a teaching of morals. Even I misunderstood that when I used to observe Buddhism from outside as Christian, and actually thought I could grasp other faiths as well.
"The Buddha questioned many of the assumptions existing in his society, including moral ones, and tried to develop an ethics based upon reason and compassion rather than tradition, superstitions and taboo. Indeed, in the famous Kalama Sutta he says that revelation (anussana), tradition (parampara), the authority of the scriptures (pitakasampada) and one's own point of view (ditthinijjhanakkhanti) are inadequate means of determining right and wrong." (Buddha Net)
It's not even about right or wrong, it's about what is skillful or unskillful. Even to five precepts there are more than meets the eye. My favorite example is sex: Christianity sees a horrible sin, apparently worse than killing, which is quietly approved, and therefore human sexuality needs to be controlled by religious authority. Buddhism does not value marriage or procreation that much, even monogamy is not always so self-evident. I hate moralism in religion, and my friend is a master of that.
I don't see real similarity between Christianity and Buddhism. Approach is very different. Do I live accordingly? Still: They are not commandments. I support Lotus Sutra. Nichiren Shonin wrote:
“The five characters of Myoho-renge-kyo, the heart of the essential teaching of the Lotus Sutra, contain the benefit amassed through the countless practices and meritorious deeds of all Buddhas throughout the three existences. Then, how can these five characters not include the benefits obtained by observing all of the Buddhas’ precepts? Once the practitioner embraces this perfectly endowed wonderful precept, he cannot break it, even if he should try. It is therefore called the precept of the diamond chalice”
What kind of idea of man do you have? Do you have a spiritual idea of man?
Idea of man? Spiritual idea of man? I don't know what to say. I'm not sure what he means by that. Perhaps different aspects of man according to Anthroposophy, because that's what he has read up on. (I used to think like that too.) Spirit and matter are not opposite to each other, apart from each other.
What do you think about God?
I rather don't use that name burdened with such strong mental images. There is this excellent video (6 min) - Is there God or not? What did Buddha say?
Perhaps it won't give a kind of direct answer one wants to hear, but perhaps it will make it clear what sort of question one is really asking...
Next quote is from the novel, The Gardens of Light, by Lebanese author, Amin Maalouf. It's about Prophet Mani, founder of Manichaeism (highly recommendable!). Since I only have read it in Finnish translation, I had to re-translate a quote myself (original text is French):
People think they worship Godhead, even though they only have seen images of it, whether made of wood, gold, alabaster, or presented in painting, or words, or ideas. The one who refuses to see God in images presented to them, may be closer to His true image than others...
When someone says they love God above all, they are actually saying they love their own concept of "god". I don't think you can even form an idea of the Ultimate Reality, and put it into words. If you say, "God exists", there is this idea and there are words; it's not "truth". You are only scrabbling blind. Not everything you put together is useless, though, like teachings of Buddha; Some of it may be quite applicable while living in this material world as bodily being, but it shouldn't be mistaken as end in itself. The Ultimate Reality is beyond human understanding.
This list of questions seemed more like a test than discussion, and personally I didn't find them relevant. They reminded me of Buddha's parable when he was asked metaphysical questions of the nature of Cosmos...
It's just as if a man were wounded with an arrow thickly smeared with poison. His friends & companions, kinsmen & relatives would provide him with a surgeon, and the man would say, 'I won't have this arrow removed until I know whether the man who wounded me was a noble warrior, a priest, a merchant, or a worker.' He would say, 'I won't have this arrow removed until I know the given name & clan name of the man who wounded me... until I know whether he was tall, medium, or short... until I know whether he was dark, ruddy-brown, or golden-colored... until I know his home village, town, or city... until I know whether the bow with which I was wounded was a long bow or a crossbow... until I know whether the bowstring with which I was wounded was fiber, bamboo threads, sinew, hemp, or bark... until I know whether the shaft with which I was wounded was wild or cultivated... until I know whether the feathers of the shaft with which I was wounded were those of a vulture, a stork, a hawk, a peacock, or another bird... until I know whether the shaft with which I was wounded was bound with the sinew of an ox, a water buffalo, a langur, or a monkey.' He would say, 'I won't have this arrow removed until I know whether the shaft with which I was wounded was that of a common arrow, a curved arrow, a barbed, a calf-toothed, or an oleander arrow.' The man would die and those things would still remain unknown to him.
This year (2023) my friend offered to send me his writing about his "Theology". I refused. For once, I was honest and straightforward about my feelings, and it was received favorably.
But then he asked me if I have locked in what is true. HE asked me! I could ask him that very question, but I haven't, because I realize how arrogant it sounds like! He might as well continue that he knows what is true. If he remembered what kind of spiritual way I have walked, he should know that I am the very opposite of that!
If anything, I can thank him for substance he has provided me to perfect my thoughts about these matters, brighter and clearer. While it's true that I identify as Nichiren Buddhist, approve of its basic teachings, and follow its tradition in my practice, I do have my own philosophy, formed by itself through life. Sometimes it's said that Buddhism is not a religion but a philosophy. I think that is one-sided view, probably favored by secular Westerners. I think it depends very much on practitioner, and their School. Buddhism is also a religion. My approach is clearly more religious one than philosophical, and Nichiren Buddhism is perhaps closer to religion than some other Schools, as I see it. Whereas my philosophy seamlessly encloses a religion I practice, it's not emptied by it. My spirituality consists of manifold aspects, since man is manifold creature.
All the time we pass each other with our words. Repeatedly I have tried to bring up what I think is the most relevant, first suggesting subtly, and later emphasizing, and yet I feel it is ignored, and instead he's clinging to details. Is there already an insurmountable abyss of understanding between us? We are both equally hopeless in this discussion, which is not discussion at all, but arguing. It starts to repeat itself, and leads to nowhere. I don't think he does it on purpose, but he offends me time and again. It doesn't require too many words. I'm aware of my own tendency of malice, and I don't know if I can always avoid it (or if I even want to).
This is why I don't want to belong to any organization, or go to some group meetings. I just walk my own way, wishing to treasure my own spiritual life in peace. Is it too much to ask? My way is not his way, he doesn't need to understand. That's how I should have answered in the first place. Everything else was unnecessary. Too many words. Unfortunately, I also happen to love words. But often less is more. It's obvious that he's not actually interested to know my truth: he's only looking for affirmation for his own assumptions. Therefore, it's useless to expect that I should be interested: The rest of my life is too short to be wasted on things that mean nothing to me. I've already seen Christianity.
I don't think he even understands how tired of this I am. I feel he's interfering with my privacy, and he's extremely biased: his list of questions gave it off. Last year I avoided him for months, and he probably didn't notice. He would hardly notice very soon if I just ceased communication entirely. I don't know why I bother so much, and don't just let it go its natural course. Nothing's permanent anyway. It must be the weight of 20 years of acquaintance.
But all this because of religion? I guess it is important for him, but is it worth it? If only Creed had united us in the past, then it wouldn't matter, for it is superficial, but I don't think that's all. And it's about 10 years already since I left Christianity. Why so suddenly it's such a big problem?
I expressed my frustration in harsh words. Far too long I have kept it to myself. Maybe it was hasty, I'm not sure, but I'm actually relieved now that it's all out in the open. The rest is up to his response, or lack thereof. We will see. I'm done for now. I only pray for the best result for both of us, and I don't really know what that is... My most urgent thought, as weird as it may sound, was: Will there be one person less at my funeral. Almost like his absence wouldn't leave a hole in my life, and I'm not sure it would... we have met so randomly in recent years anyway.
I know I'm not a friend for him. He doesn't need enemies when he's got a "friend" like me. I don't respect his beliefs and values, and he often seems to bring forth the worst in me... I wonder if I see too much of myself in him (and don't like what I see)? I would never confide in him (but who would I confide in, though, unless a professional), and I don't even want to hear about his hardships, because they are always the same, year after year, and I can't say what I think because he wouldn't receive it well. Yes, he was there when I really needed, when my partner died; he was the one who gave me his time, more than anyone else: That was true friendship, and I doubt if I was able to do the same. However, some good memories are not enough to carry on, so why even try? Is it because it's happened before; I have lost many people I once considered friends, and even by choice. It's been almost too easy to move forward, and leave people behind. But maybe I have been wrong to assume that if I lose connection with myself, I lose connection with other people, and therefore I should go inward. Maybe it is the other way round: I lose connection with other people (and more comprehensively, with Life itself!) if I withdraw too much, instead of reaching out towards others.
When we had our group meetings (2009-2012) every other week for couple of hours at the local congregation, other people took part randomly, mostly it was just the two of us, but it worked just fine, and that's what I miss most - deeper connection we had, most likely owing to shared spiritual practice, regardless of doctrines and thoughts (even though I also considered myself a Christian at that time). I was lucky to have a friend, who got involved in my whims with same earnestness, because it was also clear that not many people understood what I wanted to accomplish.
We started our meetings with tea and free discussion for an hour, another hour was for spiritual practice. We tried various methods. I don't think it matters how you practice, it's the main point that you do. Today I would choose a method which is not tied to one religion. There can be meaningful spirituality and sense of community, without reading the Scriptures and praying to God, among people from various backgrounds, and still there can be symbols and rituals that bring them together. I have watched live streams of worship services of Unitarian Universalist Unity Temple, and I like it a lot. It's not in conflict with Buddhism, there is room for that as well. (In Finland we have association too, but they have dropped "universalism" out of their name, and are just "Unitarians" now; also, based on their website, they seem to be solely attached to Jewish-Christian tradition, and that doesn't appeal to me at all!)
Is it past, then? In those days we had a white rose as a symbol - one was actually always there in our meetings, in a bowl of water - today I would bring that together (at least on mental level) with a white lotus: Simply because I love symbols; They enliven abstract ideas, and here we have both continuance and evolution. We could meet simply at the coffee shop, and practice tea meditation awhile; we also tried that in our group. It's quite informal, and allows you to pause in silence while enjoying your beverage. There's nothing awkward about silence, it is natural. (Google "Tea meditation", and you will find many inspiring instructions; apply them as you will.) We would absolutely not discuss spiritual theories or speculations whatsoever: Just one human meeting another human. Spirituality can be very narrow and restrictive role sometimes. Why would you rather talk about it, than make a genuine spiritual connection?
Drink your tea slowly and reverently, as if it is the axis on which the world earth revolves – slowly, evenly, without rushing toward the future. Live the actual moment. Only this moment is life. ~ Thich Nhat Hanh
Could we just agree to disagree. We are not interested in same things, so that's not a foundation to build on. This is a paradox: Connection and sharing is possible, also and specially without words. That's what I want to believe in. We should not communicate through e-mail anymore. Internet kind of splits your personality: who you are online, is not who you are in person. If something can not be said face to face, it shouldn't be said at all. The most refreshing meetings between us have been those, when we have just chatted this and that. I have an image in my head, of Jesus and Buddha drinking tea together. I imagine they would have got along just fine.
I am 53 years old this year, and I'm still learning new things about myself. Is it possible to ever know yourself completely, I sincerely doubt it. Today you are not who you were yesterday, rebirth is constantly going on even in one lifetime. The change is the only permanent thing in life: when there is movement, there is life. If you stop evolving, you are already dead.
I'm always willing to receive new information and correct my perception, instead of stubbornly clinging to the old. My whole life is witness for that. And if you look around and keep your ears open, you will easily notice that not so many people are capable of that.
Demisexuality
Last year I gained some valuable new insight. First of all, could it be that I am Demisexual? Wikipedia article at the time of writing this, says as follows:
"Demisexuality is a sexual orientation in which a person feels sexually attracted to someone only after they've developed a close/strong emotional bond with them..." [...] "How much Demisexuals need to know about a person before they feel sexually attracted to them varies from person to person. There is no specific timeline on how long it takes, either. There is also no way to determine what qualifies as a close or strong bond, which can cause confusion." [...] "Many Demisexuals may choose to engage in casual sex even without experiencing sexual attraction towards their sexual partner."
That would certainly explain a lot. Basicly, I'm very open and liberal about sexuality: I hate moralism, and in my fantasies I can be anything, but in the real world it is a different matter. I have often emphasized in various contexts the role of emotions in my life. In my experience I don't need to have a crush on person, let alone fall in love with them: it's enough that I know them even for a little while, and like them as a person. Of course good looks also help. That eliminates casual sex, and sex on the first meeting in general. (It's not impossible, though. I've had my share, long time ago, and it was very dissatisfying to me.) "Friends with benefits" sounds good to me!
Also, plain banging is not pleasing; there has to be tenderness, kissing and fondling involved. Intimate connection between two people should never be meaningless, otherwise why have it in the first place. It has nothing to do with morals. I almost envy those who can exchange partners just like that. I just don't feel comfortable and safe in such a situation with random stranger. In my marriage I have a freedom and permission, but I have used it only twice years ago, with two different men. (And it seems my spouse is very much like myself, with respect to sexuality as well!) So one time is okay if other conditions are met, and romantic relationship or monogamy is not necessary. It's not like there have been many opportunities during these years, so it's not really my decision. There is obviously always individual variation within human sexuality, so nobody can tell me my experience is wrong, because it is not precisely like theirs!
Self-nude from the 1990's
Demisexuality is on the Asexuality spectrum, and that first bothered me, because I felt I'm actually very sexual person, but the fact is, I've had different phases, and I know I can celibate quite easily. Also, recently when I read my old diaries from the 1990's (I was in my 20's back then), I just realized I didn't even miss or look for love or relationship at that age; all I wanted was pure and honest friendship. I had my first sexual experiences at 27, and soon after I met my partner to be: not because I really wanted to, but because of peer pressure. At the end of the day I can say that sex is not the most important thing in the world!
It's not like I want a less known, fancy label. It's hard to accept that I'm anything but "just a regular gay", or that Demisexuality is independent sexual orientation, as it seems to be seen. I am what I am anyway. But it may summarise your individual experience of your sexuality, and it only says what I have always known. Yet I have to explain what it means to me. I have been part of that old school, wondering why all these increased self-definitions; as if people want to be categorized in ever smaller groups. But maybe you understand it when you find yourself in one of those groups, and realize that this is how some people experience - I'm not the only one. These categories did not spring out of nowhere.
I have another older post, "Sex, Love, Marriage", which I think is frequently read, but it is partially dated, especially regarding my late partner and our relationship. I used to underrate emotions, simply because I had never fallen in love with him! That's why I had to emphasize reason, and make up an excuse that we gradually grew to love one another... I guess I actually managed to make myself believe that, because I needed to justify our relationship... It was in my head, more than in my heart. I didn't even know what love is, so I just made up a rational concept of it - and there's nothing rational about it! I was kind of driven to relationship with him in the first place, it was very complicated; several external factors were at play, and I was vulnerable and under the influence of strong personalities. And it was also because of him that I was even homing in on Christianity - as if I forced myself to believe in that too.
We ended up being together almost 19 years, "til death did us part". Now, spiritual-minded people often tend to believe everything happens for a reason, everything has a meaning. I guess it's more convenient than to admit that you have wasted years of your life in vain. I tried to please him, avoided conflict, got used to it, feared change, and worried for him. Obviously he had his faults too (emotional blackmail was used: no difficult stuff could be discussed, because he got depressed, and he made it clear that he would be crushed if he lost me), but I can't blame him: it was me and only me who stayed til the end, being dishonest to myself, and to him.
It is very hard to live with someone depressed, and when you add alcoholism, you are deep in the shit. No one should blame themselves if they can't go on. It is not right to sacrifice your own life for someone else, you can't save them anyway. You can think about yourself first. Maybe we were a couple that shouldn't be, but it becomes more complicated if you think about it... without him, would I have stayed with my mother in the country, and as a member of narrow-minded cult? I was in dire straits both physically and mentally, so obviously because of my partner great liberation also came about, along with pain and conflict. I can't deny that.
When I later converted to Buddhism, it came up as by itself, naturally, from within. Even though I first learnt the chant, Nam Myoho Renge Kyo, through Tina Turner, I still use my own voice, if you get what I mean: There is something learned, but also something of my own, that I express out loud. Something universal as well as something personal. And it is my Buddha Nature I call forth, not Savior from Heaven. I was matured enough for Buddhism, just like I was finally mature for true love, and found the love of my life only in latter age. These two things seem to go hand in hand in my life.
Introversion
I listened to Finnish podcast about extroverts and introverts. They interviewed a personality researcher, and it was mind-blowing! I have also taken a popular conception of introversion lying down, but reading comments on Facebook group for introverts, I have often thought, "I'm not that introverted!" I couldn't identify with the group of people who consider themselves introverts either. Often their ideas appear to be too simplified: "Because I'm an introvert, I'm like this, and can't do that..." In fact, it seems that being an introvert is similar to being Aquarius, and I do recognize a lot of typical characteristics of Aquarius in myself! Following thoughts are from the podcast...
In the world of memes, introversion has become cool. There is a rise of introversion as a cultural backlash for hyping extroverts. Many people firmly believe that we are either introverts or extroverts. Modern research does not support this idea. Most of us are something in between. In the light of scientific personality psychology, extroversion/introversion is a dimension of features, and most people are placed somewhere in the middle. There are very few real introverts and extroverts, and categorizing people in two groups does not correspond to scientifically based conception of personality psychology. People can not be dealt as categories, but as dimensions and their combinations.
Even the original developer of these concepts, Carl Jung, did not think that people divide in two extreme ends. He wrote that most people are ambiverts, or something in between. Already in the 1960's it was noted that features of personality and behavior in individual situation don't interrelate very much. Larger proportion of variation (approximately 70%) in sociability and extroversion takes place within a person than between persons. Each one of us, regardless of our place in extroversion/introversion dimension, behaves constantly in everyday life in really extroverted and really introverted ways, and everything in between.
Being energetic is already part of extroversion, one of its subfeatures. Do introverts get tired of socialization more than extroverts, that has been studied, and there is no evidence. All people may get tired of socialization to some extent, there are no differences between introverts and extroverts in the light of current knowledge.
People may explain their social withdrawal by introversion, but results of extroverted behavior are the same for both, extroverts and introverts. There is a lot of good research about extroverted behavior making us happy, and it involves everyone. According to some researches, benefits for introverts may be even greater.
Introvert and extrovert are no longer only scientific concepts, their meaning has broadened. If people use them to explain and understand themselves, that is a good thing. They have become social identities that people adopt to explain their behavior for themselves and for others. But if you lock your identity within these categories, you can miss out many things, you can evaluate the results of various action falsely. Features of our personality don't determine our behavior! Our behavior varies a lot according to situation.
Well-known Myers-Briggs test has no scientific basis whatsoever. If people feel that combination of letters they receive, represents them, there's nothing wrong with that, but this test should not be used in recruiting, or anything like that, when it has real consequences for people.
I have often determined that my spouse must be an ambivert, because in different situations he can be extremely extroverted or extremely introverted, but it looks like if he is that, then so am I. Last New Year one of his Facebook friends with their partner, whom we have briefly met, invited us at their home. But my spouse was bothered by the fact that we don't know them well enough. I understand completely. Problem is, how could we ever learn to know anyone well enough, if we don't give it a chance? We are rarely invited anywhere, because we don't know many people.
This is going to be a lighter post for a change. Kind of. I start with tv-shows and movies with gay characters and plots, that have made an impact on me during my life through these 52 years. That was my original idea anyway. And then HEARTSTOPPER 💖was released on Netflix, and I will concentrate on that at the end of this post.
Perhaps the first gay character I've seen on tv was Jodie played by Billy Crystal on Soap in the 70's, as I was a child under ten years old. And if I'm correct, his character later fell in love with a woman, so it was ruined. Of course I was too young to understand I was gay: that realization hit me when I was 12 and my sexuality was awakening, and I was thinking about other boys in my class.
Next it was Dynasty and Steven Carrington. I was watching it mostly because of him, I guess, and it was frustrating when Steven dated women. Luke Fuller played by Billy Campbell was finally such a sweet boyfriend for Steven, and of course he was killed. Viewers only saw them hugging; nothing more.
Then there was Melrose Place; I was expecting more from its gay character, Matt, and stopped watching the show, dissatisfied.
First movie I've seen on tv was probably East German (!) movie called "Coming out", 1989. Surprising as it is, I think it was pretty good and realistic. No happy ending, but neither a sad one. It was just left open.
Then there was My Own Private Idaho, starring River Phoenix, my Idol Forever; he was born in 1970, like I was, but died way too young.
Maurice was on Finnish tv just as I was in a life situation when as a member of cult I thought I would live alone. It stirred up great confusion within me. I also read the book it was based on.
Finally Beautiful Thing came out when I was taking my first steps as openly gay man; I saw it in cinema for several times. Such a sweet story.
Get Real was another good British gay movie, ending sucked a little.
When I first wrote this post, I completely forgot about Queer as Folk (both UK and US versions): I liked it a lot at that time, and it was groundbreaking series! However, it had a very different tone than most of these other tv shows or movies. Life style it depicted, never was my life, or even a dream of life I wanted.
Brokeback Mountain, of course; it's a bit melancholic, though, but sometimes you're in a mood for that too. When I said it was beautiful, my late partner used to say, "Is it beautiful when someone always dies?" And he died. And it was beautiful in a way, as much as painful.
Many later gay movies I watched illegally on web.
The cutest couples in recent years have been Leonardo and Gabriel in Brazilian film, The Way He Looks, preceded by short movie, and Isak and Evan on 3rd season of Norwegian tv series Skam.
But now finally we get to the point... HEARTSTOPPER, created by Alice Oseman. When I first saw the clips on YouTube, they already made me feel good. I immediately subscribed to Netflix only to see this show! And it is worth all the praise it has received! On Facebook group people around the globe, of different sexual orientations and different ages - including number of people around my age (52) - have told how much this show has meant to them, and how strong emotions it has raised. I'm not the only one of my kind. Even I commented, and that's something I haven't done for years on social media!
Heartstopper is so cute and tender, so beautiful and innocent. It makes you happy and joyful, and at the same time a little wistful.
Often I may watch tv shows and movies in a gay eye, meaning, that there are good looking actors. Now it's not about that at all. Yes, the main characters Nick and Charlie (Kit Connor and Joe Locke, both only 18 y.o.) represent the opposite types I usually find attractive, Nick being more athletic and Charlie more like a nerd, skinny type. Not that I would find either one of them hot, neither that I wouldn't: it's just that they fit for their roles perfectly, and their mutual chemistry is appealing.
Nick and Charlie kiss for the first time.
In a way, Heartstopper is almost a religious experience to me; it's like it has purified my mind: all of a sudden I see the world through rose-colored glasses. No longer I want to watch internet porn, haven't done that for days. This came about just in right time, as I was developing addiction. I needed this. I'm not saying there's necessarily something wrong with porn, unless it's abusive and/or becomes an addiction. In Buddhism we try to avoid extremes, and prefer the middle way, which in this case goes somewhere between lasciviousness and puritanism. We live in overly sexualized culture, that can't be denied. When obsessed with sex, you start to look at people (men) as objects, and lose a real, deeper connection.
In Heartstopper they hold hands, hug, and kiss. I remember I had kind of romantic fantasies when I was young. Back then it was not easy to see porn, let alone gay porn. Never have I been capable of one night stands with random dudes. It's just too flat. "Morals" is not to be messed up with this.
Our world needs beautiful stories, we need to believe in love. It's good to remember that even I have lived through that, experienced this, and felt that way. It was only six years ago when I fell in love with my current husband. It is the same, no matter how old you are.
For the few days now I have been like ecstatic. Something has moved in me. You don't always need to read spiritual literature to be deeply nourished and refreshed; sometimes fiction works just as well, maybe even better. What would be more spiritual in human experience than love, and at the same very physical. You can't separate spirit and matter, they are not against each other. When I fell in love in 2016, I wrote that "Love is my religion". It was so all-embracing. I was pushed aside from my self-centered orbit. Somebody else became the focus of my world. For a mystic it might be god. But isn't it the same thing in minor dimension.
Honeymoon period won't last. Though there is still love, you miss that emotion. Everything is fine, I lack nothing, and still... This can't be all. Routines form a structure to support your life, but what if that is all there is, and life is missing; you function as a robot. In the end of 2015 I was broken - I was open: years have gone by, and I have closed myself again from the rest of the world. To withdraw from life is to die; to reconnect to life, you need to connect with people. I can't get my youth back, but neither is my life ending! I need to find that inner spark again, that gave me strength and courage to make major changes in my life six years ago.
I'm reminded of a following story... "Once a man died and awoke in the other world. There St. Peter appeared before him and asked him what he wanted. He then ordered breakfast, the daily papers, and all the comforts he was accustomed to in life, and this kind of life lasted for many centuries until he got sick of it and began to swear at St. Peter and to complain of how monotonous it was in Heaven, whereupon St. Peter informed him that he was in Hell..."
Sometimes I wonder if I too died and I'm in hell... and you don't need to take this too literally, as if I was going mad, but metaphorically; sometimes people are lifeless while still on earth, and hell is a state of mind according to Buddhism. I guess my version of that story would be me being alone in peace and quiet. I would enjoy it... until I wouldn't.
As far-fetched as it may seem, all these thoughts were initiated by Heartstopper! It might sound over dramatic, but it is almost life-changing experience.
I ordered graphic novels which Heartstopper is based on, and Alice Oseman has written novels as well, so dive into this world is just beginning. I'm sure there will be season 2, because of two simple facts: a) Heartstopper has already been extremely popular, b) Not all the graphic novels are dealt yet.
It's time for a little update. First, let me say something about Covid. I don't want to underrate anyone's sufferings, but during these past two years I don't know anyone who's been hospitalized or even died because of Covid. I know one person who had it, and it was just a mild flu. I'm not saying it's not life-threatening for some people, and I still take it seriously: I have been vaccinated for three times, I wash or sanitize my hands frequently, and I think it's a good habit to keep up anyway, and I always wear a mask in public places indoors (like busses and stores), and I must say I actually like it! It has become an accessory (I always choose black). I will never shake hands again, and I think that was an unhygienic way of greeting anyway. However, in my previous post I wrote that Covid is yesterday's news, and I maintain that. We have learnt to live with it.
The Center of Tampere, my hometown: Colors of Ukraine beautifully framed by the scene.
The war in Ukraine is the bigger issue right now. I wrote I was distressed and angry. That has eased a lot, since we have witnessed the success of Ukrainian army and failure of Russia. Of course I understand it might look like just another war from afar, but I can assure you we feel the enormous pressure of the events in Finland, as we have a long border with Russia, and a memory of their invasion in 1939, which is part of our story as a nation, part of collective consciousness. As you might already know from the news, a decision for Finland to join the Nato is very close, within weeks as I write this, and Sweden will likely follow - and I believe we will join and I support it wholeheartedly, with the majority of Finns.
"Terve Ukraina" ("Hail Ukraine"): A poem by Finnish national poet Eino Leino in 1917:
A thread of nuclear war is quite marginal to me; after all, it would be a suicide. However, I have started to think it's not so unlikely we would be forced to war with Russia again, before the Nato membership is clear. But then we will fight and give them at least just as much of a resistance as the Ukrainians have! I have no military training, but I would not try to flee: I would do whatever I can. As a Buddhist, this is something I have studied recently:
It is more problematic that Orthodox Christians kill Orthodox Christians, and the head of church of the aggressive party even dares to claim that it is about which side of god humanity takes, linking the war with objection to "sinful" homosexuality and pride-parades! Christianity has never seen a real problem with killing fellowmen, even though they have a strict command from their god not to do it. No, human sexuality with all its variety has always been a bigger issue, which needs to be controlled in any way, even with force if necessary.
I admit I wasn't touched by the war in Syria. Not only it seemed distant, but there must have been a cultural gap as well: "us and them". Refugees from the Middle-East have met harsh criticism in Europe. Now it's completely different with the Ukrainians. It shouldn't be that way.
Below is a different kind of approach: A Buddhist Response to Russia-Ukraine War, by member of Rissho Kosei-kai. He argues how anyone of us, despite of geographical distance, may contribute to ending this war by practicing nonviolence in everyday life. A hint of "practical mysticism", one might say...
The Russia I grew up in doesn't exist anymore; an excellent analysis of the development of post-Soviet Russia personally experienced by Russian YouTuber, temporarily relocated in Georgia at the moment:
In the end of 90's I was studying among the group of international students here in Finland, including a 16 years old girl from Russia, who was really shocked to learn that she had been taught propaganda at school. If I remember correctly, it was about the Winter War. Also, I went to gym with this guy, Kirill, who spoke Russian, but emphasized he was from Ukraine. There was another guy from Russia, whose room was next to mine at dormitory, and he often played "Wind of Change" by Scorpions. Wind of Change, indeed. Didn't last for long. Satan never left Moscow. As I have seen an old Ukrainian woman say in the news, after the horrific deeds of Russian soldiers: "Satan came in a form of Putin". Just like I wrote in my previous post how I honestly felt.
In these days it is the war in Ukraine that fills the News, and the minds of people as well. Covid is yesterday's news. Russia's invasion was long anticipated, yet it was a shock when it finally started. I have been distressed, and angry. Anger is focused on Putin - so much so, that I even wish for his death! At the same time I readily admit it is not very positive reaction, but it's only natural. The mask is off, and we see the ugly face of a mad man, a dictator. He has become an embodiment of pure evil to me, like Satan in the flesh. I'm old enough to remember when Ronald Reagan called Soviet Union "the Evil Empire". It is back, in new guise but with old schemes.
Last time it must have been this distressful collectively when 9/11 happened. It's like a dark heavy cloud hovering above all. When Trump was elected as the president of the United States in 2016, it was upsetting, but didn't require any casualties, unless the truth is counted as one. Now Putin has demonstrated he is worse than Trump ever was: Mad men are always unpredictable, but the clever and cunning ones are the most dangerous kind. Trump was Putin's lapdog, eating from his hand.
I'm happy to see how the world has united against this tyrant, and especially how Ukrainians have protected their country with such a bravery! Now it is not the time for empty speeches, but action. Ukraine needs concrete support and help. No matter what you think of war, they have a right to defend themselves, and Russia is acting criminally. Nobody wants the third world war, but despite of sanctions against Russia and weapons to Ukraine, it is like they have been left alone to fight this terrifying enemy. As if Putin stopped at Ukraine. No matter what, Russia will never conquer people's hearts and minds! They have already lost that war.
Finnish Politician Jussi Halla-Aho, whose party I do not support, and whom I have disliked so far, published a video message aimed at the Russian people, which was surprisingly good to me (subtitled in English) - An appeal to Russians from a friend of Russians:
When will the Russian people get enlightened, determined, and courageous enough, to take a destiny of their nation into their own hands, setting it on the righteous course?
Yes, all sort of evil is going on all the time in the world, and we have witnessed wars before in my lifetime too, but I have to admit not all affects equally; This time it can't be bypassed by assuring yourself that it is happening "faraway". In today's world more than ever we are all interconnected. I don't know how it is seen by the public in the United States, for instance, but especially here in Finland where I live, for geographical and historical reasons (if you don't know what they are, maybe you should educate yourself!), it is affecting us very closely. Politicians may say that we are not threatened... Maybe not today. But Russia can't be trusted. I believe anything is possible from their part. No wonder if we are leaning towards the NATO, and perhaps we should. Finland is not "neutral". We are part of the Western world, aligned with the rest of Europe. Our government made a historical decision for the first time to send weapons to warring country.
There is so little an ordinary citizen can do, deeply touched by the events, when it feels that mere prayers aren't enough. I have donated money for National Bank of Ukraine, their special account to raise funds for Ukraine's armed forces. This may seem contradictory: I personally underwent non-military service in my 20's, I am a Buddhist, and overall consider myself a gentle and peace-loving person. However, if we were in a same situation, I would gladly make Molotov's cocktails as we have seen Ukrainian civilians doing. Of course one can donate for well-known charitable organizations, to help Ukrainians in need, and that is necessary too, but that's just trying to fix the damage done. I think more direct approach is in order.
I'm not claiming to be a prophet, but the signs of times are clear: There is something apocalyptic in the air. I know the connotations of the word, and as non-christian I use it very loosely, not in a biblical sense. But the future fate of our world is decided right now in Ukraine. That's how I feel. It's almost absurd to go to work and keep up your daily schedule, as if nothing was wrong. However, you need to stop worrying occasionally. Ukrainians don't have that luxury. If I should find something good about this, perhaps the fact that my own selfish concerns are meaningless. Isn't that compassion?
Indeed. Grandfather of my late partner was Buddhist: his experiences at war led him to that, and it helped him. I try to do tonglen and metta practices myself.
“We often think of peace as the absence of war, that if powerful countries would reduce their weapon arsenals, we could have peace. But if we look deeply into the weapons, we see our own minds- our own prejudices, fears and ignorance. Even if we transport all the bombs to the moon, the roots of war and the roots of bombs are still there, in our hearts and minds, and sooner or later we will make new bombs. To work for peace is to uproot war from ourselves and from the hearts of men and women. To prepare for war, to give millions of men and women the opportunity to practice killing day and night in their hearts, is to plant millions of seeds of violence, anger, frustration, and fear that will be passed on for generations to come. ” - Thich Nhat Hanh: Living Buddha, Living Christ
