“67. This species of composition which the law of effect points out as the perfect one, is the one which high genius tends naturally to produce. As we found that the kinds of sentences which are theoretically best, are those generally employed by superior minds, and by inferior minds when excitement has raised them; so, we shall find that the ideal form for a poem, essay, or fiction, is that which the ideal writer would evolve spontaneously. One in whom the powers of expression fully responded to the state of feeling, would unconsciously use that variety in the mode of presenting his thoughts, which Art demands….”
“68. That a perfectly endowed man must unconsciously write in all styles, we may infer from considering how styles originate. Why is Johnson pompous, Goldsmith simple? Why is one author abrupt, another rhythmical, another concise? Evidently in each case the habitual mode of utterance must depend upon the habitual balance of the nature. The predominant feelings have by use trained the intellect to represent them. But while long, though unconscious, discipline has made it do this efficiently, it remains from lack of practice, incapable of doing the same for the less active feelings; and when these are excited, the usual verbal forms undergo but slight modifications. Let the powers of speech be fully developed, however—let the ability of the intellect to utter the emotions be complete; and this fixity of style will disappear. The perfect writer will express himself as Junius, when in the Junius frame of mind; when he feels as Lamb felt, will use a like familiar speech; and will fall into the ruggedness of Carlyle when in a Carlylean mood. Now he will be rhythmical and now irregular; here his language will be plain and there ornate; sometimes his sentences will be balanced and at other times unsymmetrical; for a while there will be considerable sameness, and then again great variety. His mode of expression naturally responding to his state of feeling, there will flow from his pen a composition changing to the same degree that the aspects of his subject change….”
– quoted from the “iv. The Ideal Writer” in “PART II. CAUSES OF FORCE IN LANGUAGE WHICH DEPEND UPON ECONOMY OF THE MENTAL SENSIBILITIES” of The Philosophy of Style by Herbert Spencer (pub. 1852)
At least two or three times a year, I mention Charles Darwin’s On the Origin of Species (or, more completely, On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life). When I do so, I include a footnote, a reference to The Philosophy of Style by Herbert Spencer, because some people believe that Spencer’s treatise on writing introduced Darwin to the idea of writing about science in a way that would appeal to the masses. There is no denying that the way Charles Darwin wrote On the Origin of Species caused the work to be debated in parlours and scholastic circles, as well as in courtrooms and on lawns.
The way he wrote – the style in which he wrote – that was the overcoat.
“Saepe est etiam sub pallĭolo sordĭdo sapientia.
[English translation: Wisdom often is under a filthy cloak.]”
– Latin proverb (associated with Socrates, Diogenes, and Cicero)
Please join me today (Tuesday, July 11th) at 12:00 PM or 7:15 PM for a yoga practice on Zoom. You can use the link from the “Class Schedules”calendar if you run into any problems checking into the class. You can request an audio recording of this practice via a comment below or (for a slightly faster reply) you can email me at myra(at) ajoyfulpractice.com.
Today’s playlist is available on YouTube and Spotify. [Look for “07112020 An Introduction”]
In the spirit of generosity (“dana”), the Zoom classes, recordings, and blog posts are freely given and freely received. If you are able to support these teachings, please do so as your heart moves you. (NOTE: You can donate even if you are “attending” a practice that is not designated as a “Common Ground Meditation Center” practice, or you can purchase class(es). Donations are tax deductible; class purchases are not necessarily deductible.)
For Those Who Missed It:The following was originally posted today in 2022. Class details and links have been updated. Notes and content updates have been added at the end of the post.
“1. If any one ensnare another, putting a ban upon him, but he can not prove it, then he that ensnared him shall be put to death.
2. If any one bring an accusation against a man, and the accused go to the river and leap into the river, if he sink in the river his accuser shall take possession of his house. But if the river prove that the accused is not guilty, and he escape unhurt, then he who had brought the accusation shall be put to death, while he who leaped into the river shall take possession of the house that had belonged to his accuser.
3. If any one bring an accusation of any crime before the elders, and does not prove what he has charged, he shall, if it be a capital offense charged, be put to death.
4. If he satisfy the elders to impose a fine of grain or money, he shall receive the fine that the action produces.
5. If a judge try a case, reach a decision, and present his judgment in writing; if later error shall appear in his decision, and it be through his own fault, then he shall pay twelve times the fine set by him in the case, and he shall be publicly removed from the judge’s bench, and never again shall he sit there to render judgement.”
*
– quoted from the Code of Hammurabi (translated by L. W. King, as posted on the Yale Law School’s Lillian Goldman Law Library website for The Avalon Project: Documents in Law, History, and Diplomacy)
Before we go any further, let me clarify something important. The title of this blog post can be – and is intended to be – taken in different ways. This is not, however, a treatise on the beginning of how people started taking legal action against one another. Although, to that end, I will say that carved and chiseled tablets from as far back as 2350 BCE provide very clear evidence of Near East, Middle East, and African societies with codified expectations, processes, and precedents. Here in the West, the most well-known of these ancient legal texts is probably the Code of Hammurabi (circa 18th century BCE), which is recognized as the laws of Hammurabi, sixth king of the First Dynasty of Babylon. Preserved on a stone slab over 7 feet (i.e., over 2 meters) tall, the text contains an image of King Hammurabi and Shamash, the Babylonian sun god and god of justice, followed by several thousands of lines of cuneiform text.
The Code of Hammurabi includes 282 rules and guidelines, which establish what happens “if” someone does something – or is accused of doing something – and what happens “[w]hen” they are proven guilty or “if” they are proven innocent “then” what happens to the accuser. The latter are particularly interesting to me, because there is no double standard: falsely accusing someone could carry the same penalty as having done the deed. It is also interesting to note that (per the fifth code, as quoted above) judges were not above the penalty of law – a rule that underscores the responsibility that comes with judicial power.
In many cases, the penalty for grievances were severe (and final). While some parts of our modern Western society have done away with the death penalty and most have eliminated “trial by river,” we can very clearly trace many of our laws, litigation processes, and penalties through the history of the Abrahamic religions and into the here-and-now – at least, from a purely historical perspective. In fact, the Code of Hammurabi is so historical significant to our modern society that Hammurabi’s image is included in the relief portraits of lawgivers located over the gallery doors of the House Chamber in the United States Capital – right next to Moses and across from two gentleman from Virginia: George Mason and Thomas Jefferson.
“We will now discuss in a little more detail the struggle for existence…. I should premise that I use the term Struggle for Existence in a large and metaphorical sense, including dependence of one being on another, and including (which is more important) not only the life of the individual, but success in leaving progeny.”
*
– from On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life by Charles Darwin (pub. 1859)
So, again, this post is not about the history of law. Instead, this post is about a trial that started today in 1925. It is not, as any good law professor or lawyer will tell you, the first (or the first significant) trial in the United States of America. Therefore, it is not the beginning of this great nation’s (sometimes way too “great”) litigation system. However, when I think about litigation that set a precedent for the way laws and legal proceedings affect society – and are affected by society – I think of The State of Tennessee v. John Thomas Scopes, better known as “The Scopes Monkey Trial,” which took place in Dayton Tennessee (July 10-21, 1925).
At the center of the trial, legally speaking, was John Thomas Scopes, a high school biology substitute teacher who was accused of violating Tennessee’s “Butler Act” by teaching evolution during a high school biology class. Tennessee teachers were required, by law, to not teach evolution or deny Intelligent Design (ID) – even though the required text book had a chapter on evolution. By most accounts, Scopes skipped the chapter, but he still provided an opportunity to challenge what some considered an unconstitutional Act. Given the subject matter, it is not surprising that the trial became a carnival-like spectacle. There were vendors selling Bibles, toy monkeys, hot dogs, and lemonade. Despite the summer heat, the crowd size eventually increased to the point that the whole thing had to be moved outside. Those who couldn’t make it to Tennessee and/or the court “room” could listen to the trial on the radio. And, everyone had an opinion. Of course, the legal opinions that mattered came from the lawyers.
“Science is a magnificent force, but it is not a teacher of morals…. If civilization is to be saved from the wreckage threatened by intelligence not consecrated by love, it must be saved by the moral code of the meek and lowly Nazarene. His teachings, and His teachings alone, can solve the problems that vex the heart and perplex the world.”
*
– quoted from William Jennings Bryan’s written summation to The State of Tennessee v. John Thomas Scopes (as distributed to the press), July 1925
*
“My statement that there was there was no need to try this case further, and for the court to instruct that the defendant is guilty under the law was not made as a plea of guilty or an admission of guilt. We claim that the defendant is not guilty, but as the court has excluded any testimony, except as to the one issue as to whether he taught that man descended from a lower order of animals, and we cannot contradict that testimony, there is no logical thing to come except that the jury find a verdict that we may carry to the higher court, purely as a matter of proper procedure. We do not think it is fair to the court or counsel on the other side to waste a lot of time when we know this is the inevitable result and probably the best result for the case. I think that is all right?”
*
– quoted from Clarence Darrow’s “bench statement” just before the jury’s verdict was announced in The State of Tennessee v. John Thomas Scopes, July 21, 1925
William Jennings Bryan – who was known as “The Great Commoner” and “The Boy Orator” – represented the state of Tennessee and, therefore, the idea that man was created by (the Abrahamic) God and had no relation to “other” primates. By 1925, when the trial occurred, Mr. Bryan had severed the country as a litigator; a member of the U.S. House of Representatives (from Nebraska’s 1st district); and as the 41st U. S. Secretary of State (serving under President Woodrow Wilson). He had also, unsuccessfully, run for president on three different occasions. He was adored by some, abhorred by some, and was nothing short of polarizing. [As a side note, William Jennings Bryan died five days after the verdict came in of the “Scopes Monkey Trial.”]
Then there was Clarence Darrow, for the defense.
Clarence Darrow was prominent member of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and had just (the previous year) wrapped up the very public “Leopold and Loeb murder” trial. He was considered a witty, sophisticated country lawyer, who even had the audacity to put the state’s attorney (William Jennings Bryan) on the witness stand. In 1925, Clarence Darrow was already establishing his reputation as a brilliant criminal defense lawyer who fought for the underdog. Just as was the case when he represented Nathan Leopold and Richard Loeb, his motivation for representing John Scopes wasn’t about whether or not his client broke the law. It wasn’t even, as he pointed out in his summation, whether or not the court would find his client guilty. No, Clarence Darrow’s focus was ultimately about whether or not laws and punishments made sense. As he would illustrate in his later defense of the brothers Ossian Sweet and Henry Sweet (1926), as well as of Thomas Massie (1931), he was about the rule of law and “the law of love.”
“I do not believe in the law of hate. I may not be true to my ideals always, but I believe in the law of love, and I believe you can do nothing with hatred. I would like to see a time when man loves his fellow man, and forgets his color or his creed. We will never be civilized until that time comes.”
*
– quoted from the end of Clarence Darrow’s 7-hour closing argument in The People of Michigan v. Henry Sweet (the second of the “Sweet Trials, involving a defendant from the racially charged The People of Michigan v. Ossian Sweet et al.), May 11, 1926
Clarence Darrow’s “law of love” is the same “moral code of the meek and lowly Nazarene” that William Jennings Bryan cited and, ironically, it speaks directly to the origin of Charles Darwin’s treatise on evolution. That is to say, it is related to how we are all connected and how our survival is based on “dependence of one being on another.” However, those early teachings – which actually predate Jesus – are not always practiced as they are preached. Similarly, evolution as it was debated in Tennessee in 1925 and at Oxford University in 1860, was not exactly what Darwin presented in 1859. In fact, the scientist never even used the word “evolution” in his first text. But, it didn’t take long for his argument to, ummm, evolve (or devolve, depending on your perspective). The way Darwin approached the subject was partially responsible for why it changed and why it can still be such a hot topic.
“There is grandeur in this view of life, with its several powers, having been originally breathed into a few forms or into one; and that, whilst this planet has gone cycling on according to the fixed law of gravity, from so simple a beginning endless forms most beautiful and most wonderful have been, and are being, evolved.”
*
– from On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life by Charles Darwin
The idea of evolution didn’t start with Charles Darwin. No, even the Greek philosopher Aristotle (384–322 BCE) referenced earlier ideas (that predated his life) and contemplated an internal purpose (related to survival). Aristotle believed that this “internal purposiveness” existed in all living beings and could be passed down through generations. So, if the idea existed before Darwin’s On the Origin of Species (or, more completely, On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life) was published on November 24,1859, why did Darwin’s work create such an uproar?
To get to the origins of Origins – or at least the controversy, chaos, and uproar around it, let’s go back to 1852, when Herbert Spencer, an English philosopher, biologist, anthropologist, and sociologist used the German term “entwicklungsgeschichte” (“development history”), which had previously been used in relation to embryos and single cell organisms, to explain cosmic and biological changes in societies. Spencer would later write an essay coining the phrase “theory of evolution” – in relation to Darwin’s work. However, in the same year (1852) that Spencer wrote about cultures having “development history,” he also wrote an essay called “The Philosophy of Style” in which he promoted writing “to so present ideas that they may be apprehended with the least possible mental effort.” In other words, Spencer advocated writing to make the meaning plain and accessible.
I can’t say for sure how much Darwin himself was influenced by Spencer, but it is very clear that Darwin wrote On the Origin of Species for non-specialists. In other words, he wrote it for the masses. And, as it was easily understood (and written by a then esteemed scientist), it became wildly discussed – in the parlors and in the public. The first big public debate occurred onJune 30, 1860 during the British Science Association’s annual meeting at Oxford University. The next big public debate started today, July 10, 1925, in Dayton, Tennessee (USA). In both cases, what people remember is the way two very articulate men squared off around matters of faith and reason, and the moral and ethical implications of believing one origin story over the other.
As predicted by his lawyer, John Scopes was found guilty by the jury. The judge fined him $100 (the equivalent of about $1,670.26, as I post this today). As planned, the case was appealed to the Supreme Court of Tennessee (in 1926). All five of the defense’s constitutional points of appeal were rejected by the higher court. However, the verdict was overturned on a technicality: the $100 penalty required by the legislation was higher than what the state constitution said a judge could apply. Had the jury assigned the fine, it is possible that the case could have continued to the Supreme Court of the United States.
“It has often and confidently been asserted, that man’s origin can never be known: but ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge: it is those who know little, and not those who know much, who so positively assert that this or that problem will never be solved by science.”
*
– from The Descent of Man, and Selection in Relation to Sex by Charles Darwin (pub. 1871)
The fact that “The Scopes Monkey Trial” is related to Charles Darwin’s On the Origin of Species is tangentially related to why I think of it as a litigation “origin” story. More importantly, as the first United States trial to be nationally televised broadcasted on the radio, The State of Tennessee v. John Thomas Scopes set a precedent on how trials are covered by the press and how the public pays attention to such trials. The press was right there, in the court “room” and, therefore, it put the whole country in the jury box; hearing testimony in real time. It was the beginning of a national (even an international) court of public opinion that’s not restricted to the parlors and the streets. Instead, this expanded defacto jury also becomes a judging and legislating body that is quick to convert cases into real world applications (and vice versa). For example, the initial verdict in 1925, led to several state legislations debating anti-evolution legislation – most of which were rejected, but some of which were codified. While Tennessee’s “Butler Act” was rescinded September 1, 1967, there have been similar legal and pedagogical debates in the United States as recently as 2005 and 2007 (hello, Kansas – where evolution is still officially “an unproven theory”). The case also led to changes in science text books (across the country) and changes in the way in which students were taught – and not just about how they were taught biology.
Finally, as a textbook case on how the U. S. legal system could work, ”The Scopes Monkey Trial” was/is a primer for how the constitution can be applied to day-to-day life and how that application can be defended… or rejected. It is a tried and true First Amendment case and, to me, is the origin story of how so many Americans view the legality of their constitutional rights, as well as how they understand their rights to challenge how the constitution is applied and the process by which they might exercise those rights. As so many states (including my own home state) codify things that I view as absolutely egregious (and unconstitutional) – and as SCOTUS shockingly overturns precedent – I see lots of opportunities for Scopes-like ”tests.”1
As soon as Texas created it’s ”bounty hunter” abortion law, I said there’s going to be some Scope-like cases testing this. Within a matter of days, cases were filed. Just a couple of weeks ago, mere days after SCOTUS overturned Roe v Wade and Planned Parenthood v Casey, a woman here in Texas was pulled over while driving in the high-occupancy vehicle (HOV) lane. She was cited for not having at least one passenger. The woman, who is pregnant, cited the aforementioned Texas penal code and the SCOTUS decision as ”proof” that she was driving lawfully. She was given a ticket, which means she gets her day in court.2 I don’t know anything else about this woman and I don’t know anything about her politics, but – whether her motivations are purely economic or whether they are more expansive – her case will put these matters to the test.
And, how ever, those cases are decided, the world will be watching… and discussing.
”Now, we came down here to offer evidence in this case and the court has held under the law that the evidence we had is not admissible, so all we can do is to take an exception and carry it to a higher court to see whether the evidence is admissible or not. As far as this case stands before the jury, the court has told you very plainly that if you think my client taught that man descended from a lower order of animals, you will find him guilty… and there is no dispute about the facts. Scopes did not go on the stand, because he could not deny the statements made by the boys. I do not know how you may feel, I am not especially interested in it, but this case and this law will never be decided until it gets to a higher court, and it cannot get to a higher court probably, very well, unless you bring in a verdict…. We cannot argue to you gentlemen under the instructions given by the court we cannot even explain to you that we think you should return a verdict of not guilty. We do not see how you could. We do not ask it.”
*
– quoted Clarence Darrow’s statement to the jury, just before the verdict was announced in The State of Tennessee v. John Thomas Scopes, July 21, 1925
Please join me for a 75-minute virtual yoga practice on Zoom today (Monday, July 10th) at 5:30 PM. You can use the link from the “Class Schedules” calendar if you run into any problems checking into the class. You can request an audio recording of this practice via a comment below or (for a slightly faster reply) you can email me at myra (at) ajoyfulpractice.com.
There is no playlist for the Common Ground Meditation Center practices.
The 2022 playlist is available on YouTube and Spotify. [Look for the “Hays Code” playlist dated “March 31” on YouTube and “03302020” on Spotify]
The Law of Love
“Let no debt remain outstanding, except the continuing debt to love one another, for whoever loves others has fulfilled the law.”
– The Epistle of Paul the Apostle to the Romans (13:8, NIV)
“For all the law is fulfilled in one word, even in this; Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. But if ye bite and devour one another, take heed that ye be not consumed one of another.”
– The Epistle of Paul the Apostle to the Galatians (5:14-15, KJV)
*
“Is it on your grandmother’s or grandfather’s side that you are descended from an ape?”
*
– Bishop Samuel Wilberforce to Thomas Henry Huxley (reportedly), June 30, 1860
*
“I asserted – and I repeat – that a man has no reason to be ashamed of having an ape for his grandfather. If there were an ancestor whom I should feel shame in recalling it would rather be a man – a man of restless and versatile intellect – who, not content with an equivocal success in his own sphere of activity, plunges into scientific questions with which he has no real acquaintance, only to obscure them with aimless rhetoric, and distract the attention of his hearers from the real point at issue by eloquent digressions and skilled appeals to religious prejudice.”
*
– Thomas Henry Huxley to Bishop Samuel Wilberforce (reportedly), June 30, 1860 (from Life and Letters of Thomas Henry Huxley, by his Son Leonard Huxley by Leonard Huxley (Volume I)
*
NOTES & UPDATES: 1Historically, the United States has a history of legal cases that could be considered what I refer to as “Scopes-like tests.” Please note, however, that – up until recently – such cases involved real people, doing real things. John Scopes was an actual teacher in an actual classroom and he was legally found guilty based on the statutes and evidence.
2Brandy Bottone was the Plano resident who claimed her unborn child as her second passenger. At some point in 2022, she was issued a second ticket for a similar violation. She also gave birth to a healthy baby girl. The first ticket was dismissed in June 2022.
In the spirit of generosity (“dana”), the Zoom classes, recordings, and blog posts are freely given and freely received. If you are able to support these teachings, please do so as your heart moves you. (NOTE: You can donate even if you are “attending” a practice that is not designated as a “Common Ground Meditation Center” practice, or you can purchase class(es). Donations are tax deductible; class purchases are not necessarily deductible.)
“‘Every act of perception,’ [Dr. Gerald] Edelman writes, ‘is to some degree an act of creation, and every act of memory is to some degree an act of imagination.’”
*
“Many composers, indeed, do not compose initially or entirely at an instrument but in their minds. There is no more extraordinary example of this than Beethoven, who continued to compose (and whose compositions rose to greater and greater heights) years after he had become totally deaf. It is possible that his musical imagery was even intensified by deafness…. There is an analogous phenomenon in those who lose their sight; some people who become blind may have, paradoxically, heightened visually imagery.”
*
– quoted from Musicophilia: Tales of Music and the Brain by Dr. Oliver Sacks (b. 07/09/1933)
Please join me for a 65-minute virtual yoga practice on Zoom today (Sunday, July 9th) at 12:00 PM. Use the link from the “Class Schedules” calendar if you run into any problems checking into the class. You can request an audio recording of this practice via a comment below or by emailing myra (at) ajoyfulpractice.com.
Sunday’s playlist is available on YouTube and Spotify. [Look for “07092022 Awareness of the Mind’s Awareness”]
“We are able to find everything in our memory, which is like a dispensary or chemical laboratory in which chance steers our hand sometimes to a soothing drug and sometimes to a dangerous poison.”
*
– quoted from The Captive, Volume 5 of Remembrance of Things Past (or In Search of Lost Time) by Marcel Proust (b. 07/10/1871)
In the spirit of generosity (“dana”), the Zoom classes, recordings, and blog posts are freely given and freely received. If you are able to support these teachings, please do so as your heart moves you. (NOTE: You can donate even if you are “attending” a practice that is not designated as a “Common Ground Meditation Center” practice, or you can purchase class(es). Donations are tax deductible; class purchases are not necessarily deductible.)
ERRATA (That is also a correction): Corrected the date of Marcel Proust’s birthday.
For Those Who Missed It: The following was originally posted today in 2020. Class details have been updated.
“If we could raise one generation with unconditional love, there would be no Hitlers. We need to teach the next generation of children from Day One that they are responsible for their lives. Mankind’s greatest gift, also its greatest curse, is that we have free choice. We can make our choices built from love or from fear.”
– Elisabeth Kübler-Ross, M.D.
“I cannot leave out the problem of life and death. Many young people and others have come out to serve others and to labor for peace, through their love for all who are suffering. They are always mindful of the fact that the most important question is the question of life and death, but often not realizing that life and death are but two faces of one reality. Once we realize that we will have the courage to encounter both of them….
Now I see that if one doesn’t know how to die, one can hardly know how to live—because death is a part of life.”
– quoted from The Miracle of Mindfulness: An Introduction to the Practice of Meditation by Thích Nhất Hạnh
Today’s post and class will be tricky for some. Today’s theme is always tricky for some. Although, I would assert that it shouldn’t be. After all, death is part of life. That can come off glib and easy to say – specifically because it is a little glib, or shallow, because it belies the fact that loss is hard and that most of us haven’t/don’t really face the concept of death until we (or someone we love) is dying. The statement “death is part of life” is also shallow because it belies the fact that, even if we meditate on and prepare for death, loss is still hard. Yes, death and dying are something that we all have to deal with, but to just leave it at that is what makes the subject tricky. We have to, as Thích Nhất Hạnh instructs in The Miracle of Mindfulness, go deeper.
“The five stages – denial, anger, bargaining, depression, and acceptance – are a part of the framework that makes up our learning to live with the one[s] we lost. They are tools to help us frame and identify what we may be feeling. But they are not stops on some linear timeline in grief. Not everyone goes through all of them or goes in a prescribed order.”
– quoted from On Grief and Grieving: Finding the Meaning of Grief Through the Five Stages of Grief by Elisabeth Kübler-Ross and David Kessler
Born in Zürich, Switzerland today in 1926, Dr. Elisabeth Kübler-Ross was the oldest triplet in a family of Protestant Christians. Despite her father’s wishes, she grew up to be a psychiatrist known for her work on death and dying, life and death, and the five stages of grief. Her ultimate work was in part inspired by her work with refugees in Zürich during World War II. After the war, she participated in relief efforts in Poland and, at some point, visited the Maidanek concentration camp in Poland. As a young woman, standing in a place of destruction, she was struck by the compassion and human resilience that would inspire someone to carve hundreds of butterflies into the walls of the death camp.
Dr. Kübler-Ross originally planned on being a pediatrician. However, she married a fellow medical student (in New York in 1958) and became pregnant. The pregnancy resulted in the loss of her pediatrics residency, so she switched to psychiatry. Unfortunately, she also suffered two miscarriages before giving birth to two children. The loss of her residency and her miscarriages were not her first (or last) experiences with loss. Her marriage ended in divorce and, when she attempted to build a Virginia hospice for infants and children with HIV/AIDS, someone set fire to her home (in 1994). The house and all of the belongings inside were lost to arson.
When she started her psychiatry residency, Dr. Kübler-Ross was struck by the way hospitals in the United States treated patients who were dying. She began to host lectures where medical students were forced to meet and listen to dying people outside of a clinical setting. Her intention was to get medical students to “[react] like human beings instead of scientists…and be able to treat [terminal patients] with compassion the same compassion that you would want for yourself.” As she moved through her career, she continued hosting the series of seminars which used interviews with terminally ill patients. Her work was met with both praise and criticism – most of the latter was because she was so obviously questioning the traditional practices of psychiatry. In 1969, she released her seminal book On Death and Dying: What the Dying Have to Teach Doctors, Nurses, Clergy and Their Own Families, which provided a grief model for people who were dying and for those they were leaving behind.
“Those who have the strength and the love to sit with a dying patient in the silence that goes beyond words will know that this moment is neither frightening nor painful, but a peaceful cessation of the functioning of the body.”
– quoted from On Death and Dying: What the Dying Have to Teach Doctors, Nurses, Clergy and Their Own Families by Elisabeth Kübler-Ross
Dr. Kübler-Ross explained from the beginning that her outline was not intended to be linear and yet, people wanted to be able to step through the stages with grace and ease. The problem with that mindset is… life is messy and so is grieving. A perfect example of the messiness of life and death can be found in Dr. Kübler-Ross’s own life… and death. In 1995, after a series of strokes which left her partially paralyzed on her left side, she found herself confronted with the reality of her own death. Added to her grief was the closing of Shanti Nilaya (“Final Home of Peace”), a healing and growth center which she had established in the later 1970’s (shortly before her divorce) after convincing her husband to buy 40-acres of land in Escondido, California.
Despite a 2002 interview with The Arizona Republic, where she stated that she was ready to die, Dr, Kübler-Ross struggled with the fact that she could not choose her own time of death. He son Ken, Founder and President of the Elisabeth Kübler-Ross Foundation, served as her caregiver for the last decade of her life. In a 2019 interview with the hosts of ABC Radio’s Life Matters, Ken said, “A few weeks before she passed she said to me, ‘Kenneth, I don’t want to die.’”
“It is not the end of the physical body that should worry us. Rather, our concern must be to live while we’re alive – to release our inner selves from the spiritual death that comes with living behind a facade designed to conform to external definitions of who and what we are.”
– quoted from Death: The Final Stage of Growth by Elisabeth Kübler-Ross
Ken Ross admitted that he was taken aback by his mother’s statement that she did not want to die. It turned out, Dr. Kübler-Ross was not only physically paralyzed; she was also stuck in the anger stage of her own grief model. She caught flak in the media – as if she were somehow above being human simply because she had studied, taught, and spoken so openly and so frequently on the subject of death and dying. She did not stay there (in the anger stage), however, as her family and friends encouraged her to keep living and to keep processing the experience of dying. Her son even literally pushed her out of her comfort zone by assisting her in wheelchair marathons and in visiting her sisters in Europe.
“[She] let herself be loved and taken care of, then that was her final lesson — and then she was allowed to graduate. For years I thought about this and what I realized was that’s exactly what she teaches. [When] you learn your lessons you’re allowed to graduate.”
– Ken Ross in a 2019 “Life Matters” interview on ABC Radio National
“In Switzerland I was educated in line with the basic premise: work, work, work. You are only a valuable human being if you work. This is utterly wrong. Half working, half dancing – that is the right mixture. I myself have danced and played too little.”
– Elisabeth Kübler-Ross, M.D. in an interview
Please join me for a 90-minute virtual yoga practice on Zoom today (Saturday, July 8th) at 12:00 PM. Use the link from the “Class Schedules” calendar if you run into any problems checking into the class. You can request an audio recording of this practice via a comment below or by emailing myra (at) a joyfulpractice.com
Saturday’s playlist is available on YouTube andSpotify. [Look for “07082020 On Death & Dying”]
“The most beautiful people we have known are those who have known defeat, known suffering, known struggle, known loss, and have found their way out of the depths. These persons have an appreciation, a sensitivity, and an understanding of life that fills them with compassion, gentleness, and a deep loving concern. Beautiful people do not just happen.”
“Strange though it may seem to you, one of the most productive avenues for growth is found through the study and experience of death. Perhaps death reminds us that our time is limited and that we’d better accomplish our purpose here on earth before our time runs out. Whatever the reason….Those who have been immersed in the tragedy of massive death during wartime, and who have faced it squarely, never allowing their senses and feelings to become numbed and indifferent, have emerged from their experiences with growth and humanness greater than that achieved through almost any other means.”
– quoted from Death: The Final Stage of Growth by Elisabeth Kübler-Ross
In the spirit of generosity (“dana”), the Zoom classes, recordings, and blog posts are freely given and freely received. If you are able to support these teachings, please do so as your heart moves you. (NOTE: You can donate even if you are “attending” a practice that is not designated as a “Common Ground Meditation Center” practice, or you can purchase class(es). Donations are tax deductible; class purchases are not necessarily deductible.)
### “People are like stained glass windows. They sparkle and shine when the sun is out, but when the darkness sets in, their true beauty is revealed only if there is a light from within.” EKR ###
Peace and blessings to everyone (and especially to anyone who was celebrating Ivanа-Kupala)!
For Those Who Missed It: The following was originally posted in 2020 (and an abridged version was reposted in 2021). In addition to slight revisions, class details, links, and an additional quote have been updated and/or added.
“He showed the words ‘chocolate cake’ to a group of Americans and recorded their word associations. ‘Guilt’ was the top response. If that strikes you as unexceptional, consider the response of French eaters to the same prompt: ‘celebration.’”
– quoted from In Defense of Food: An Eater’s Manifesto by Michael Pollan
When people like something (or someone) – I mean, really, really like something (or someone) – they sometimes say “it’s the best thing since sliced bread” – which is funny when you consider that there’s only one day honoring “sliced bread.” On the flip side, there are at least ten days devoted to chocolate:
Bittersweet Chocolate Day (January 10th)
Chocolate Day in Ghana (the second largest producer of cocoa) (February 14th)
World Chocolate or International Chocolate Day (July 7th and/or 9th)
World Chocolate Day in Latvia (July 11th)
Milk Chocolate Day (July 28th)
S. National Confectioners Association’s International Chocolate Day (September 13th)
White Chocolate Day (September 22nd)
National Chocolate Day in the United States (October 28th)
Chocolate Covered Anything Day (December 16th)
Chocolate contains phenols, which may act as antioxidants in the body and reduce “bad” cholesterol. Other documented health benefits to eating chocolate include the fact that chocolate can cause the brain to release all four of its so-called “love chemicals” (oxytocin, serotonin, dopamine, and endorphins). That, however, doesn’t explain why there are so many different kinds of chocolate. I mean, when you really get down to it, there are probably as many kinds of chocolate – and ways of enjoying chocolate (or, in my opinion, ruining chocolate) – as there are people on the planet. We can break chocolate down as chocolatiers do: into real chocolate (made from chocolate liquor and cocoa butter) and compound coatings/chocolate (cocoa powder and vegetable oil). However, even then there are different kinds of chocolate.
Some people say mass produced chocolate in the USA tastes like plastic compared to chocolate from Europe. (It kinda does, see previous paragraph to understand why.) Some people only like chocolate in candy, while others only appreciate it in cake or brownie form. Dogs can only eat white chocolate, because, well… it’s not actually chocolate. And some people will eat anything – and I do mean anything – covered in chocolate.
“Wie ich Dich liebe, Du meine Sonne, ich kann mit Worten Dir’s nicht sagen. Nur meine Sehnsucht kann ich Dir klagen und meine Liebe, meine Wonne!”
In which way I love you, my sunbeam, “I cannot tell you with words. Only my longing, my love and my bliss can I with anguish declare.”
– German and English lyrics of a love poem (to Alma Mahler-Werfel) associated with the final movement of “Symphony No. 5” composed (and written) by Gustav Mahler (b. 07/07/1860)
Chocolate has a long history of being used as a gift / token of affection and friendship. It also has a long wartime history as it was consumed during the U. S. Revolutionary War and has been a standard part of the United States military ration since the original ration D or D ration bar of 1937. The D ration bar was intended to “taste a little better than a boiled potato.” Arguably, it did not (but, the K ration bars arguably did.) Allied soldiers reportedly gave bits of chocolate to people they freed from concentration camps and it is still something soldiers use to establish connections in the field. According to The Chocolate Store, (US) Americans consume 2.8 billion pounds of chocolate per year (over 11 pounds per person), which is significantly more than our European counterparts – who, I’ll repeat, arguably have access to better mass produced chocolate.
Maybe one of these (chocolate) days, I’ll do a deep dive into why there are so many different days celebrating chocolate. (I mean, other than the obvious commercial reasons and well… because it’s chocolate.) Today, however, I just want to point out that people are as particular about chocolate as they are about beer, wine, and burgers – which makes yoga a lot like chocolate.
None of that, however, points to why we compare really amazing things to sliced bread instead of to chocolate.
“He was a very patient, inventive man. He had an office in the basement of this big house they lived in, in Davenport, Iowa, that he called his dog house. He went there every time he got in trouble with my grandmother. When he was there, he was inventing or thinking about inventing things.”
– Susan Steinhauer Hettinger talking about her grandfather Otto Frederick Rohwedder
Otto Frederick Rohwedder, born today in 1880, in Davenport, Iowa, invented the first automatic bread-slicing machine for commercial use. Rohwedder was an inventor and engineer who studied optometry and spent a short period of time as a jeweler. His work with jewelry and watches inspired him to create machines that would make life easier for people. After a delay, due to a fire that destroyed his original blueprints and prototype, Rohwedder was able to apply for a patent and sell his first bread-slicing machine, which also wrapped the bread to ensure freshness.
Rohwedder sold his first machine to his friend Frank Bench, owner of Chillicothe Baking Company in Chillicothe, Missouri and his second machine to Gustav Papendick in Saint Louis, Missouri in 1928. Papendick reportedly improved upon the way the machine wrapped the bread and applied for his own patents. While there is some argument about who sold the very first loaf of sliced bread using Rohwedder’s machine, documented evidence points to Bench selling the first loaf today in 1928. It was advertised as “the greatest forward step in the baking industry since bread was wrapped.”
Texas Toast not-withstanding, commercially sliced bread was thinner and more easily accessible than a regular loaf of bread – so people ate more bread. Like chocolate, sliced bread was rationed in the United States during World War II. In fact, sliced bread was briefly banned in 1943. Whether the ban was lifted because of the huge outcry from regular every day housewives and people like New York City Mayor Fiorello Henry La Guardia or because there just wasn’t that much saved in the ban is a matter of opinion.
Bottom line, sliced-bread changed people’s lives and the way they moved through their days… kind of like yoga.
NOTE: In 2020, World Chocolate Day and (what I’ll call) “the best day since sliced bread,” fell on the same day as Ivanа-Kupala in the Ukraine, Poland, Belarus and Russia. Ivana-Kupala is a Slavic summer holiday that combines the pagan celebration and fertility rituals of Kupala (and midsummer) with Orthodox Christian observations of the Feast Day of Saint John the Baptist. The observing countries use the Julian calendar (as opposed to the Gregorian calendar) so their celebration actually occurs (for them) on June 23rd – 24th (as opposed to July 6th and 7th, in non-Slavic countries). In 2023, the celebration fell on July 7th, in non-Slavic countries. One of the elemental aspects of the celebrations focuses on the combination of fire and water.
Please join me for a “First Friday Night Special” tonight (July 7th) at 7:15 PM – 8:20 PM (CST), for a virtual Yin Yoga practice on Zoom that may be the best thing since sliced bread. Use the link from the “Class Schedules” calendar if you run into any problems checking into the class. You can request an audio recording of this practice via a comment below or by emailing myra (at) ajoyfulpractice.com.
This practice is accessible and open to all.
Prop wise, this is a kitchen sink practice.You can practice without props or you can use “studio” and/or “householder” props. Example of “Studio” props: 1 – 2 blankets, 2 – 3 blocks, a bolster, a strap, and an eye pillow. Example of “Householder” props: 1 – 2 blankets or bath towels, 2 – 3 books (similar in size), 2 standard pillows (or 1 body pillow), a belt/tie/sash, and a face towel.
You may want extra layers (as your body may cool down during this practice). Having a wall, chair, sofa, or coffee table may be handy.
In the spirit of generosity (“dana”), the Zoom classes, recordings, and blog posts are freely given and freely received. If you are able to support these teachings, please do so as your heart moves you. (NOTE: You can donate even if you are “attending” a practice that is not designated as a “Common Ground Meditation Center” practice, or you can purchase class(es). Donations are tax deductible; class purchases are not necessarily deductible.
This is a “missing” post for July 5, 2023 (and also for 2022).You can request an audio recording of either practice via a comment below or (for a slightly faster reply) you can email me at myra (at) ajoyfulpractice.com.
In the spirit of generosity (“dana”), the Zoom classes, recordings, and blog posts are freely given and freely received. If you are able to support these teachings, please do so as your heart moves you. (NOTE: You can donate even if you are “attending” a practice that is not designated as a “Common Ground Meditation Center” practice, or you can purchase class(es). Donations are tax deductible; class purchases are not necessarily deductible.
“Every body continues in its state of rest, or uniform motion in a right line, unless compelled to change that state by forces impressed upon it.”
– “Law 1” quoted from “Axioms, or Laws of Motion” in Philosophiæ Naturalis Principia Mathematica by Sir Isaac Newton
NOTE: Some editions use the term “straight line.”
Take a moment to relax, maybe place your hand(s) on your belly, and observe what happens if nothing gets in the way. Notice how your tension-free belly rises and falls as the breath enters and leaves the body. Notice how the “force” of the breath, which is a symbol of our life and a symbol of our spirit, is an agent of change – physically, mentally, emotionally, and even energetically.
You can use your breath, forcefully, to break up and/or release tension. Similarly, lengthening the breath and observing the breath (which can all be described as prāņāyāma) change things when we are practicing on the mat. The way we breathe and the awareness of our breath can also be an agent of change off the mat. We just have to pay attention and stay focused to things that are naturally occurring.
However, paying attention, staying focused, and even breathing deeply in and breathing deeply out can be challenging in certain situations… especially situations involving challenging people… rigid bodies, if you will.
“I most gladly embrace your proposal of a private correspondence. What’s done before many witnesses is seldom without some further concerns than that for truth; but what passes between friends in private, usually deserves the name of consultation rather than contention; and so I hope it will prove between you and me….
But in the mean time, you defer too much to my ability in searching into this subject. What Descartes did was a good step. You have added much several ways, and especially in considering the colours of thin plates. If I have seen farther, it is by standing on the shoulders of giants.”
– quoted from a letter marked “Cambridge, February 5, 1675-76” from Sir Isaac Newton to Dr. Robert Hooke, as published in Memoirs of the Life, Writings, and Discoveries of Sir Isaac Newton by David Brewster
Sir Isaac Newton was just a 43-year old “natural philosopher” when he published the first edition of his Philosophiæ Naturalis Principia Mathematica (Mathematical Principles of Natural Philosophy) today in 1687. The treatise included definitions of terms, his laws of motion, and a law of universal gravitation. It was partially based on Sir Isaac Newton’s own observations of the natural world and partially based on the theories, definitions, and observations of others. Those others, which Sir Isaac Newton referred to as “giants,” included Galileo Galilei and Johannes Kepler – whose laws of planetary motion were themselves modifications of the observations and heliocentric theory of Nicolaus Copernicus, yet another giant.
All of the aforementioned natural philosophers – or scientists, as we now call people who study matter and the mechanics of matter in space and time (i.e., physics), started with phenomena that was naturally occurring; could be observe in nature; and could be duplicated on some level. Then they went deeper… or farther, depending on your perspective. For Sir Isaac Newton, going deeper and farther meant having discussions with some his peers and even with some people who were skeptical of his work. He even had an ongoing correspondence with one of his master teachers and precious jewels – someone we might refer to as a “rigid body.”
An object at rest remains at rest, and object in motion remains in motion (at the same speed and in the same direction, unless acted upon by an unbalanced force).
The acceleration of an object is dependent upon two variables – the net force acting upon the object and the mass of the object.
For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.
– Sir Isaac Newton’s Laws of Motion
In physics, a “rigid body” (or “rigid object”) is a solid collection of matter that (a) does not change in size or shape or (b) changes at such a miniscule level that it is not perceptible. In quantum mechanics, the focus is on a collection of points – which, on a very rudimentary level, takes us back to the original definition. Focusing on a collection of points means highlighting a consistent distance between points that allows for the external appearance of stillness. In Albert Einstein’s theory of special relativity, nothing is absolutely rigid and, therefore, something is only considered “rigid” if it is not moving at the speed of light. This latter understanding means that the issue of something (or someone) being rigid becomes an issue of perception (and relativity).
Just like with the laws of motion – and, in particular with “The Law of Inertia” (i.e., the first law), the idea of a “rigid body” is physical science that can be observed on and off the mat. We can observe it in the way we move – physically, mentally, emotionally, and even energetically. We can observe it in the way holding a pose is perceived as “stillness,” even though there is movement and change. If we just go a little deeper, we start to notice cause-and-effect and how the laws of motion are also the laws of karma. For example, if we do something nice for someone, they can do something equally nice for someone else. When we really pay attention, we start to notice the the ways things (and people) change over time – even when they appear not to change.
“Every relationship you develop, from casual to intimate, helps you become more conscious. No union is without spiritual value.”
– quoted from “Morning Visual Meditation” (Chakra 2) by Caroline Myss
According to Eastern philosophies, like Yoga and Buddhism, everything is an opportunity for practice. In fact, the Yoga Sūtras include many reminders that everything is an opportunity to learn more about ourselves, about our true nature, and about the universe. Yoga Sūtra 2.18 specifically states that everything is an opportunity to liberate ourselves. So, what do we do when we interact with someone who seems resistant to change and/or to seeing things from different perspectives?
We could view them as master teachers, precious jewels, and/or rigid bodies.
Master teachers give us a master classes in ourselves. Precious jewels – like a grain of sand or salt in the shell of an oyster, clam, or other shelled mollusks – can be that irritating source of something we eventually view as valuable. It’s all a matter of perspective. One way to cultivate this perspective is by viewing another person as our reflection. If we are interacting with someone who appears to be “hooked,” we might recognize that we are (possibly) also “hooked” – which is the first step in getting “unhooked.”Similarly, if we feel like we are banging our head up against a brick wall and start seeing someone as a “rigid body,” we might ask ourselves: What/where is the change we are not perceiving?
Remember, according to Albert Einstein’s theory of relativity, nothing is absolutely rigid. Ergo, change is always happening… somewhere.
It is happening inside the mind-body of people we may consider rigid; it is also happening inside of our own mind-body. We are not responsible for the change that is happening (or not happening) inside of someone else. However, when we notice the possibility of change inside of ourselves, the question then becomes, do you resist the change or embrace the change? Answering that question does not mean that we give up on our ideas or conform to the way someone else thinks. No, it means going deeper and farther… like Sir Isaac Newton.
“‘But this I immediately discovered in him,’ adds [Dr. Henry Pemberton*], still further, ‘which at once both surprised and charmed me. Neither his extreme great age, nor his universal reputation had rendered him stiff in opinion, or in any degree elated. Of this I had occasion to have almost daily experience. The remarks I continually sent him by letters on his Principia, were received with the utmost goodness. These were so far from being anyways displeasing to him, that, on the contrary, it occasioned him to speak many kind things of me to my friends, and to honour me with a public testimony of his good opinion.’ A modesty, openness, and generosity, peculiar to the noble and comprehensive spirit of Newton. ‘Full of wisdom and perfect in beauty,’ yet not lifted up by pride nor corrupted by ambition. None, however, knew so well as himself the stupendousness of his discoveries in comparison with all that had been previously achieved; and none realized so thoroughly as himself the littleness thereof in comparison with the vast region still unexplored.”
– quoted from “Life of Sir Isaac Newton” by N. W. Chittenden, as published in Newton’s Principia: The Mathematical Principles of Natural Philosophy; To which is added, Newton’s System of the World by Isaac Newton, translated into English by Andrew Motte (first American edition; New York: published [1848] Daniel Adee, c1846)
*NOTE: Dr. Henry Pemberton edited the third edition of the Philosophiæ Naturalis Principia Mathematica (Mathematical Principles of Natural Philosophy).
Up until the twentieth century (and the publication of Albert Einstein’s theory of relativity), the Philosophiæ Naturalis Principia Mathematica (Mathematical Principles of Natural Philosophy) was the starting point for many scientist as they observed and explored the natural movement of the world. In many ways, that first edition was also Sir Isaac Newton’s starting point.
After sharing his ideas and theories, Sir Isaac Newton went back, reviewed his work, and published a second edition of the Philosophiæ Naturalis Principia Mathematica (Mathematical Principles of Natural Philosophy), with annotation and corrections, in 1713. He published a third edition in 1726. Eventually, he was recognized as one of the world’s greatest mathematicians and physicists and his Principia became the foundation for classical mechanics – one of the cornerstones of modern physics.
Eventually, Sir Isaac Newton became one of the “giants.”
“A short time before his death he uttered this memorable sentiment: ‘I do not know what I may appear to the world; but to myself I seem to have been only like a boy playing on the sea-shore, and diverting myself in now and then finding a smoother pebble or a prettier shell than ordinary, while the great ocean of truth lay all undiscovered before me.’ How few ever reach the shore even, much less find ‘a smoother pebble or a prettier shell!’”
– quoted from “Life of Sir Isaac Newton” by N. W. Chittenden, as published in Newton’s Principia: The Mathematical Principles of Natural Philosophy; To which is added, Newton’s System of the World by Isaac Newton, translated into English by Andrew Motte (first American edition; New York: published [1848] Daniel Adee, c1846)
The playlist for Wednesday, July 5, 2023, is available on YouTube and Spotify. [Look for “10202020 Pratyahara”]
“Every body continues in its state of rest, or uniform motion in a right line, unless compelled to change that state by forces impressed upon it.”
– “Law 1” quoted from “Axioms, or Laws of Motion” in Philosophiæ Naturalis Principia Mathematica by Sir Isaac Newton
NOTE: Some editions use the term “straight line.”
Please join me today (Wednesday, July 5th) at 4:30 PM or 7:15 PM for a yoga practice on Zoom. Use the link from the “Class Schedules” calendar if you run into any problems checking into the class. You will need to register for the 7:15 PM class if you have not already done so. You can request an audio recording of this practice via a comment below or by emailing myra (at) ajoyfulpractice.com.
Wednesday’s playlist is available on YouTube and Spotify. [Look for “10202020 Pratyahara”]
In the spirit of generosity (“dana”), the Zoom classes, recordings, and blog posts are freely given and freely received. If you are able to support these teachings, please do so as your heart moves you. (NOTE: You can donate even if you are “attending” a practice that is not designated as a “Common Ground Meditation Center” practice, or you can purchase class(es). Donations are tax deductible; class purchases are not necessarily deductible.
Happy 4th (for those who are celebrating). Many blessings to all!!
“Perhaps the sentiments contained in the following pages are not yet sufficiently fashionable to procure them general favor; a long habit of not thinking a thing wrong, gives it a superficial appearance of being right, and raises at first a formidable outcry in defense of custom. But the tumult soon subsides. Time makes more converts than reason.”
– quoted from the “Introduction” to Common Sense, signed by the “Author” (Thomas Paine, known as “The Father of the American Revolution”) and dated “Philadelphia, February 14, 1776
The following excerpt is from a 2020 post:
“On Wednesday, July 3, 1776, the future President of the United States, John Adams, wrote two letters to his wife Abigail. In one of the letters he theorized about the pros (like Canada being included in the declaration) and cons (like still having to deal with ‘The Hopes of Reconciliation, which were fondly entertained by Multitudes of honest well meaning tho weak and mistaken People…’) of making the declaration earlier. He then wrote, ‘The Second Day of July 1776, will be the most memorable Epocha, in the History of America.
I am apt to believe that it will be celebrated, by succeeding Generations, as the great anniversary Festival. It ought to be commemorated, as the Day of Deliverance by solemn Acts of Devotion to God Almighty. It ought to be solemnized with Pomp and Parade, with Shews, Games, Sports, Guns, Bells, Bonfires and Illuminations from one End of this Continent to the other from this Time forward forever more.’
Meanwhile, Caesar Rodney rested and, on Thursday, July 4, 1776, he wrote a letter to his younger brother Thomas indicating, ‘I arrived in Congress (tho detained by thunder and rain) time enough to give my voice in the matter of independence… We have now got through the whole of the declaration and ordered it to be printed so that you will soon have the pleasure of seeing it.’ He, like a good majority of the signers, would sign the finalized “Declaration of Independence” on August 4th – although others would sign all the way up until November.”
Please join me today (Tuesday, July 4th) at 12:00 PM or 7:15 PM for a yoga practice on Zoom. You can use the link from the “Class Schedules”calendar if you run into any problems checking into the class. You can request an audio recording of this practice via a comment below or (for a slightly faster reply) you can email me at myra(at) ajoyfulpractice.com.
Today’s playlist is available on YouTube and Spotify. [Look for “4th of July 2020”]
NOTE: The playlists are slightly different, but mostly with regard to the before/after class music. The biggest difference is that the videos below do not appear on Spotify.
In the spirit of generosity (“dana”), the Zoom classes, recordings, and blog posts are freely given and freely received. If you are able to support these teachings, please do so as your heart moves you. (NOTE: You can donate even if you are “attending” a practice that is not designated as a “Common Ground Meditation Center” practice, or you can purchase class(es). Donations are tax deductible; class purchases are not necessarily deductible.)
ERRATA: The earlier version of this post did not include the videos.
Many blessings to all, and especially to those preparing for Guru Purnima!
This is the post for Sunday, July 2nd. My apologies for not posting before the 2:30 practice. You can request an audio recording of this practice via a comment below or by emailing myra (at) ajoyfulpractice.com.
In the spirit of generosity (“dana”), the Zoom classes, recordings, and blog posts are freely given and freely received. If you are able to support these teachings, please do so as your heart moves you. (NOTE: You can donate even if you are “attending” a practice that is not designated as a “Common Ground Meditation Center” practice, or you can purchase class(es). Donations are tax deductible; class purchases are not necessarily deductible.)
“Like many anniversary celebrations, the plan for 1987 takes particular events and holds them up as the source of all the very best that has followed. Patriotic feelings will surely swell, prompting proud proclamations of the wisdom, foresight, and sense of justice shared by the Framers and reflected in a written document now yellowed with age. This is unfortunate. Not the patriotism itself, but the tendency for the celebration to oversimplify, and overlook the many other events that have been instrumental to our achievements as a nation. The focus of this celebration invites a complacent belief that the vision of those who debated and compromised in Philadelphia yielded the ‘more perfect Union’ it is said we now enjoy.
I cannot accept this invitation, for I do not believe that the meaning of the Constitution was forever ‘fixed’ at the Philadelphia Convention. Nor do I find the wisdom, foresight, and sense of justice exhibited by the Framers particularly profound. To the contrary, the government they devised was defective from the start, requiring several amendments, a civil war, and momentous social transformation to attain the system of constitutional government, and its respect for the individual freedoms and human rights, we hold as fundamental today. When contemporary Americans cite ‘The Constitution,’ they invoke a concept that is vastly different from what the Framers barely began to construct two centuries ago.”
– quoted from the speech given by Supreme Court Justice (and former NAACP chief counsel) Thurgood Marshall at The Annual Seminar of the San Francisco Patent and Trademark Law Association, Maui, Hawaii May 6, 1987
The following excerpts are from 2020 posts:
“If you talk about freedom, liberty, and independence, and then reference a significant horse ride, most people in America will think about Paul Revere and his midnight ride (of April 18, 1775). If you ask someone from Delaware, however, they might also mention Caesar Rodney, whose ride is depicted on the back of the ‘Delaware quarter.’”
“Freedom. Liberty. Independence. We’ve already established [in Parts 1 & 2] that when Caesar Rodney cast his vote for independence, today in 1776, his vote did not extend freedom, liberty, or independence to all humans within his territory. But, that is not the end of today’s story. Exactly 132 years after Caesar Rodney’s famous ride to cast a vote for independence, a baby boy was born to a railroad porter named William and his wife Norma, a teacher. This son, a descendant of enslaved people on both sides, would spend his whole life working to extend those freedoms to all. Today in 1964, on his 56th birthday, he received a great ‘birthday present’ in the form of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
But, I’m getting ahead of myself.
Let’s go back to Baltimore, Maryland on July 2, 1908.”
Sunday’s playlist is available on YouTube and Spotify. [Look for “07012020 Caesar Rodney’s Ride”]
“And so we must be careful, when focusing on the events which took place in Philadelphia two centuries ago, that we not overlook the momentous events which followed, and thereby lose our proper sense of perspective. Otherwise, the odds are that for many Americans the bicentennial celebration will be little more than a blind pilgrimage to the shrine of the original document now stored in a vault in the National Archives. If we seek, instead, a sensitive understanding of the Constitution’s inherent defects, and its promising evolution through 200 years of history, the celebration of the “Miracle at Philadelphia” Bowen, Miracle at Philadelphia: The Story of the Constitutional Convention May to September 1787 (Boston 1966), will, in my view, be a far more meaningful and humbling experience. We will see that the true miracle was not the birth of the Constitution, but its life, a life nurtured through two turbulent centuries of our own making, and a life embodying much good fortune that was not.
Thus, in this bicentennial year, we may not all participate in the festivities with flag-waving fervor. Some may more quietly commemorate the suffering, struggle, and sacrifice that has triumphed over much of what was wrong with the original document, and observe the anniversary with hopes not realized and promises not fulfilled. I plan to celebrate the bicentennial of the Constitution as a living document, including the Bill of Rights and the other amendments protecting individual freedoms and human rights.”
– quoted from the conclusion to the speech given by Supreme Court Justice (and former NAACP chief counsel) Thurgood Marshall at The Annual Seminar of the San Francisco Patent and Trademark Law Association, Maui, Hawaii May 6, 1987
This is an extra post for July 1st, specifically related to the 2022 practice.
“The vast range of experiences life offers falls into two main categories: desirable and undesirable. The nine obstacles described in the previous sutra rob the body of vitality, strength, stamina, and agility, and the mind of clarity and peace. The absence of these obstacles is the ground for joy.”
– quoted from the commentary on Yoga Sūtra 1.31 from The Secret of the Yoga Sutra: Samadhi Pada by Pandit Rajmani Tigunait, PhD
In Eastern philosophies, like Yoga and Buddhism, freedom, independence, and liberty are directly related to suffering and bondage. That is to say, there is a focus on how we free ourselves of dysfunctional/afflicted thought patterns – like avidyā (“ignorance” or “nescience”) – and what happens when we are free of those root causes of suffering. Therefore, I am always talking about freedom – even when I never mention the word. This is especially true in June and July, when there is a certain amount of hyperawareness with regard to freedom, independence, and liberty.
Still, it is super surreal to have so many people focused on celebrating freedom, independence, and liberty while so many people are simultaneously focused on taking away freedom, independence, and liberty. What makes it even more surreal is that there are also people fighting to preserve (and even extend) the freedom, independence, and liberty that was declared back in 1776.
July 1776.
Normally, July 1st is a day when my focus is on the work/effort to declare independence, secure freedom, and preserve liberty. I think about how Caesar Rodney, a Delaware delegate of the American Continental Congress and Brigadier General of Delaware Militia (just to name a few of his roles), rode two days – across muddy roads, rickety bridges, slippery cobblestones, and swollen streams; enduring extreme heat, dust, and thunderstorms; all while suffering from asthma and wearing a face mask to cover his cancer-ravage jaw – just to represent his constituents and to “vote for independence” on July 2, 1776. And, I know, he wasn’t specifically riding for me (or people like me), but that’s not the point. The point is that he did what he did for liberty, for freedom, for independence.
Sometimes, I fast forward and mention the efforts of Sengbe Pieh (also known as Joseph Cinqué) and the other enslaved Mende, West Africans who revolted on the slave ship La Amistad sometime around July 1, 1839. I might also mention how John Quincy Adams – then a 73-year old former president and, at the time, an active member of the House of Representatives – helped them secure their freedom through the U. S. Courts system. I might even mention the work of the United States Supreme Court which, on March 9, 1841, announced that, in the case of United States v. Schooner Amistad, 40 U.S. (15 Pet.) 518 (1841), the majority of the justices (7 of 9) decided that the Africans were indeed free individuals who had been kidnapped; that they had the right to assert their freedom; and that (as Justice Joseph Story wrote in the majority opinion) “the United States are bound to respect their rights.”
“Brothers, we have done that which we purposed, our hands are now clean for we have Striven to regain the precious heritage we received from our fathers.”
– Sengbe Pieh (also known as Joseph Cinqué or Joseph Cinquez) as quoted on the lithograph by Isaac Sheffield, commissioned by The New York Sun (published on August 31, 1839, erroneously credited to “James Sheffield”)
Yes, normally, I focus on the effort and wait until the third or the fourth to focus on resting.
However, in the last few years, I have seen more and more freedom fighters burning out. I have seen more and more people doubting their own efforts and succumbing to the stress of what feels like a never-ending battle. Maybe, like me, these people grew up with the old sayings about how there’s “no rest for the weary” and that we’ll sleep when we’re dead. Maybe they don’t believe the can afford the rest when there is so much to do. But….
“On a ride of more than 80 miles in sultry weather, rest is necessary for both man and beast. Where Rodney stopped on his tiresome journey for food and a breathing spell for his noble steed is not known. Doubtless it was at some of the country dwellings along the route. He was no egotist and never told much about the story himself. It was simply a day’s work with him, and not a matter of which to boast.
A deadly cancer in his face, which had been growing for several years, must have burned and pained him, but the fire of patriotism also burned in his heart and physical discomfiture did not deter him from carrying on. Nightfall found him still many miles from Philadelphia, and his weary mount must have rest.”
– quoted from the Sunday, June 28, 1931, The Washington Post article, “Little Sung Heroes of Independence: Caesar Rodney, Death in the Saddle With Him, Rode From His Home in New Castle, by the Sweet Waters of the Delaware, to Philadelphia and Made the Fourth of July Possible.”* by Frank B. Lord
While there is something to the idea of mind over matter, there is a point where the mind-body says, “Nope, we’re done.” In that moment, we may appear to keep going, but we may not be very effective. In that moment, we must remember that we need to rest and digest in order to create – and, make no mistake, the act of fighting to preserve freedom is a creative act.
So, I offer you this invitation. Take a moment to release, relax, and rest. Take a moment to put down your burdens and allow yourself to be supported. Take a moment to restore yourself to your own true nature. In doing so, you strengthen your connection to your power and to your purpose.
Last year (2022), July 1st was a Friday. More specifically, it was a First Friday and, therefore, we had the opportunity to focus on rest with a 65-minute restorative yoga practice. I invite you to request an audio recording of this practice via a comment below or by emailing myra(at) ajoyfulpractice.com.
The playlist for this practice is available on YouTube and Spotify. [Look for “07012020 Caesar Rodney’s Ride”]
NOTE: For the restorative practice, you can start with Track #1 or, for a less dynamic option, start with Track #9, #10, or #11.
*NOTE: The Washington Post (1931) article is a dramatic re-telling, rather than a news article.
In the spirit of generosity (“dana”), the Zoom classes, recordings, and blog posts are freely given and freely received. If you are able to support these teachings, please do so as your heart moves you. (NOTE: You can donate even if you are “attending” a practice that is not designated as a “Common Ground Meditation Center” practice, or you can purchase class(es). Donations are tax deductible; class purchases are not necessarily deductible.)
A Joyful Practice 