Posted by: Jed | May 29, 2009

Goats

While I’m waiting for stuff to download here at an internet café in Kathmandu, I thought I’d take a moment to tell you about goats.

Goats are not only one of the preferred meats of Indians and the Nepalese, they are strange and extremely entertaining creatures. Yesterday I watched as a couple of kid goats — who are surprisingly cute at that age — bucked and flopped and played atop the brick walls around the monastery.

young goats

Kid goats playing at Triten Norbutsé monastery in Kathmandu.

Back at Menri I once stopped just below the temple to blow my nose. When I looked up there was a goat there. I had not seen or heard him approach. He and his cronies, who were close behind, were positively obsessed with this strange thing called “blowing one’s nose.” When I stopped blowing and looked up, they halted their approach. When I resumed, they crept closer. Kind of like that creepy kids’ game in The Orphanage. See below for the goats.

And then, of course, there’s one of my favorite bits of goat multimedia, The Fainting Goats.

Posted by: Jed | May 20, 2009

Daughters

Just one more quick one before I go.

daughters bad sign, no sex determination

If you just look quickly at the small(er) print you might think that there are people in Solan who cannot decipher their own sexual orientation, or who would like to switch. Taking in all of the information reveals a scarier truth, however, which is that it is dangerous to be a daughter in the womb.

I remember our last trip to India, during which we met a pregnant woman who in all ways seemed to be a modern Indian cosmopolite. She was glowing with the life inside her and seemed happy in her love (non-arranged) marriage. When we asked whether it would be a girl or a boy, she said, “If it’s a girl I’ll kill it.” She smiled, and we laughed uncomfortably under furrowed brows. “I hate girls,” she said. “I hate daughters.”

This is not terribly uncommon on the world stage, but it is especially acute in the dowry culture here. A daughter is a major financial liability, enriching other families with the wealth of their own when they are married off.

Things are changing  — and by no means do all mothers actually treat their daughters like crap — but the sign above and the law it invokes speak for themselves. Indeed, signs for willing sex determination clinics allegedly say things like, “Pay 1,000 rupees now, save 100,000 later.”

Posted by: Jed | May 19, 2009

Kathmandu Again

Howdy, folks. I’m headed back to Kathmandu shortly to observe the main ritual that I’m studying. The little posting I’ve done of late is likely to get even littler, as I hear there is only four hours of electricity a day over there right now.

The truth is that there are probably only a few posts left in me before I return home at the beginning of August. Things are just too hectic as I try to finish up.

But I’ll be responding to emails and comments as usual, so ask away!

Jed

Posted by: Jed | May 11, 2009

Indian Sweets and Pastries

I am generally not a huge fan of Indian sweets. They’re mostly fudgy lard-milk squares as seen below. You might be saying to yourself that fudgy lard-milk squares sound kind of good. Sometimes they are. Every now and then one square tastes fresh and rich and delicious. More often, the old lard has taken on a  flavor that is both mildly putrid and somehow crayon-like.

The pastries are a different story. They do amazing things with pistachio nuts, cumin, sugar, salt, flour, and of course lard. The “Jeera Biscuits” — sort of like a delicate shortbread cookie with a sprinkling of cumin seeds, sugar, and salt — are phenomenally good. Every time I’m in Solan I buy a case for 50¢ to last the week.

Many of the others are tasteless, however. They do terrible things with chocolate here. Or, I should say, the chocolate itself is terrible. I have yet to sample anything chocolate that doesn’t taste like newspaper sprinkled with Nestle Quik powder.

Despite my negative review, I will be happy to play beefeater with the sweets pictured above, or any others, in order to satisfy readers’ curiosities. If you would like a detailed description of the experience of eating any of the above, post a comment or send an email, making specific reference to its placement in the pictures.

Posted by: Jed | April 28, 2009

Fire by the Nunnery

Another forest fire broke out or was set right above the nunnery and on the back side of the hill it’s on. Unfortunately, this video is terrible, like all my videos, but maybe you can get a sense of scale when I switch to night shot. I keep waiting for one to sweep up the monastery hill and level it. This one is the closest yet — I could hear the roar of trees being swallowed up.

I shot this from outside my room earlier tonight, actually. I just went out and noticed that it’s twice as big and moving down the hill. I can’t see the nunnery because it’s too dark and there’s smoke everywhere, but at this rate they’ll have to evacuate.

Posted by: Jed | April 26, 2009

Why Ask Why?

sonam-kundop

Sonam Kundop, who is actually one of the rare askers of why

I was frustrated one day a couple of months ago because I was stumbling over how to ask a simple “why” question. Months of living among Tibetans and I couldn’t form a simple question. Ridiculous! But then I realized that part of the reason for this is that you almost never hear monks — or any Tibetans for that matter — asking why.

I asked Geshé Tenzin, one of my teachers, what he thought about foreign practitioners, now that he has met so many. He said, “Tibetan practitioners always just accept everything without questioning. Foreigners always want to know the what and the why.”

In Kathmandu, when I would meet with the head of the School of Practice, he would make fun of me by following up the most mundane of my statements with, “Why?” and then let loose an infectious giggle.

About half of the monks I’ve met have asked me what I’m doing at Menri, but the questions generally stop there. The other questions they ask are all of the same ilk: Where are you going? When did you arrive? How long will you stay? Have you eaten? Maybe 10% of all conversations with monks feature questions beyond these four.

There is an interesting possible cultural dynamic here. Are Tibetans religiously or otherwise temperamentally predisposed to live closer to the present? Are why questions too bound up with distant past or future motivations and actions? Or maybe karma makes why questions irrelevant?

One ramification of this has become all too clear in recent days. Geshés and others never thought to ask what visitors thought about Bön, why they are interested in Bön, what they plan to say about Bön in their research publications. Now that the results of such research are emerging, the monks see that the people they helped are saying things that the monks never said — the conclusions these people reached are different and sometimes inflammatory or pejorative or just don’t make sense to them.

Is this kind of crisis enough to alter what seems to be a deeply embedded cultural trait? Or will the monks just refuse to interface with individuals whose motives are ambiguous? Unfortunately, for now, the evidence points to the latter.

Posted by: Jed | April 24, 2009

Showdown, Conclusion

The scholar spent ten minutes explaining that he wrote his book from a historical and sociological perspective, not from a religious perspective. He based his conclusions on evidence from documents and carvings, not from oral tradition. It was good that he said this, but it didn’t matter.

monks-passionately-asking-questions-and-making-points-to-and-about-karmay-and-his-book-the-arrow-and-the-spindle

As soon as his ten minutes were up, arms shot up in the audience. The first monk to stand up made a good point about something the scholar had written about the founder of the tradition. The monk’s voice became increasingly impassioned as he quoted from the book and questioned how the scholar could make such a conclusion based on the limited evidence.

Monks behind him joined in, boisterously supporting his question and clarifying. When things got too loud or animated, the administrating monks hissed and clicked and waved their hands up and down.

A couple of monks had no questions to ask, only strong condemnations and pleas, and when they finished their speeches, the audience erupted in applause.

Bodies hunched forward on chairs, jumped up and sat back down, reached eagerly for the microphone, beat fists into their own thighs, and craned to look in all directions to see what others were doing and saying. A few pointed out that Muslims would behead such a traitor.

The scholar shrank in his chair and the flesh on his face sagged more with each question. Despite his defense that he was working from a different perspective and was only presenting his opinion, he had very little to say to monks who pointed out that Buddhists and other detractors would use his work to say, “You see? Even Bönpos are calling themselves fakes!”

In the end, the scholar admitted some errors, both in his original work (which is now 30 years old, after all) and in the translation from English to Tibetan, which was assisted by Buddhist monks who may have been inept at capturing the subtlety of certain ideas and expressions.

I asked a number of monks afterwards how it went and responses were mixed. Some said he had no good answers while others said it was a success because he agreed to change some things.

A fascinating meeting of traditional and modern, orthodox and heterodox, passion and passion. Selfishly, I’m just hoping this was a positive enough encounter that the monks will be willing to work with me again.

Posted by: Jed | April 22, 2009

Showdown

Tonight was the night. The Bönpo scholar whose book has created such a stir among the monks arrived a couple of days ago and agreed to a Q&A tonight in the library gathering room. For the past couple of days the monks have been studying as he has carried on with his business, visiting with Rinpoché, emailing with friends and colleagues at home in Paris, washing his clothes, and so on.

The scholar starts out by explaining himself and his book

The scholar starts out by explaining himself and his book

At 5:45 pm tonight a steady stream of monks flowed into the library and up the stairs until there was a mountain of flip-flops, shower sandals, and old beaten-up loafers in front of the library gathering room. The scholar took a seat in front, flanked by a few of the elite monks who would help maintain order and clarify questions for him.

The room was positively sizzling with energy as people got situated. I couldn’t help but feel serious potential for things to get ugly. I was positioned with my camera in the middle of a throng of monks and wondered briefly if I should move to a safer, less populated corner of the room.

One of the flanking monks stood up to explain the ground rules. The scholar would give a brief introduction, after which each monk was allowed no more than two questions. Everybody would stay calm.

The scholar thanked everyone for coming and began.

To be continued…

Posted by: Jed | April 17, 2009

Emotion and Belief

A big thing just happened over here. I have never seen the monks so angry. Some of them are threatening violence — or, I should say, threatening that others should do violence — while others are just shaking their heads in shame and sadness. Two of them are refusing to work with me any longer.

What happened?

A Tibetan scholar in the west who was once a Bönpo geshé published a book in English 30 years ago. This book questioned some of the basic beliefs of Bön, claiming that its founder was a normal guy who lived 1500 years ago instead of a divine figure who came to earth 18,000 years ago. It claimed that this normal guy couldn’t have written the canonical texts attributed to him. And so on.

This controversial book was recently translated into Tibetan and just arrived at the monastery. The monks had heard rumors about this book and this scholar but could never read his work for themselves. Now that they have, they feel the foundations of their tradition buckling and fear the polemical landslide from Buddhists and others who will say, “You see? Even your own Bönpo geshé is saying you’re phonies!”

I spoke to His Holiness about this and about these monks, and he pointed to his temple, shut his eyes tightly, and bellowed, “Orth-o-dox!”

There may be teachings about the danger of clinging to things — even or especially to the teachings themselves — but such an intellectual overlay has a hard time containing the emotional upwelling of a lifetime of faith and belief.

In any event, the scholar is set to arrive here the day after tomorrow to give a talk and answer questions. I hope he knows what he’s up against. I’m sure he does.

Posted by: Jed | April 15, 2009

Touching

One cultural thing that has taken me a while to get used to is touchiness between men. My friends at home will tell you that I’m generally a good hugger, even with men, and that sometimes I don’t even resort to the typical half-jokey exaggerated back slapping and manly sounds. But it’s a whole other ball game here.

two-random-monks-who-wanted-their-picture-taken

Touchy monks in Kathmandu

One of the first geshes I met when I arrived came right up to me and grabbed both my hands. I shook them up and down in an awkward double handshake but he kept holding on for the duration of the conversation. Indeed, he does it nearly every time I see him, and our posture must look to westerners a little like we are saying our vows at an altar.

Other geshes will just hold one hand at length, or put their hand on your forearm during small talk. One non-monk Tibetan guy in Kathmandu would occasionally come up and put his arm around my neck so that it was like a friendly loose headlock.

This guy also told me that I was very handsome. Some other monks have told me that I have a nice body. I’ve gotten used to the touching and unexpected compliments, but I’m still working on how to accept the latter gracefully. Usually I laugh and say, “Thanks, so do you!” in a very loud and disingenuous way.

touchy-dudes-on-bus

Two touchy friends on the bus from Solan to Ochaghat

It’s very common to see Indian men walking hand-in-hand and, as Erin and I saw in Goa and Kerala, to see them frolicking in the ocean holding hands and grabbing each other’s arms and so on. But public affection between men and women is very much frowned upon.

It’s also interesting to note that I occasionally see monks being touchy with each other, but only the geshes and His Holiness will touch me. The monks keep their distance, even if I’m good friends with them and joking around.

This touchiness is obviously a normal cultural trait — every culture has different ideas about affection, personal space, etc. — but it’s also hard not to consider monk affection in terms of the dynamics arising from celibacy, abstinence, and close living quarters. Yet another topic worthy of a research project!

Older Posts »

Categories