Jesus the Buddha

I haven't blogged for a while. I haven't been sure where this blog was going, who I'm writing for. Maybe just for myself?

Visiting My Parents, My Earthly Roots

I just returned to Moab from a bicycle trip to Fruita, Colorado to see my parents & brother. It was nice seeing them and my brother's 2 boys also. The bike trip was splendid, too. I did part of it on Kokopelli's trail, which kinda follows the Colorado river. I saw 3 different herds of pronghorns, and the weather was perfect for riding.

My parents and I talked a lot about the Christian walk and the Bible. I'm often astounded at how accepting they are of my chosen lifestyle. It is about getting us to face the teachings of Jesus, after all. Growing up, Christianity was the center of our home-life, so was always the center of conversation - and still is. When I went through years of clinical depression, with bitterness about the hypocrisy of Christianity, there was a lot of silence when I visited my parents. Then I realized there can be no Divine Peace until we find reconciliation with our roots, and, in fact, find reconciliation with every particle of the universe.

This time, looking beyond the political & religious disagreements, I learned profound things from my parents, could see their spiritual authenticity shining through.

The Middle Path Between the Two Extremes

The path of Truth is a razor's edge, the Upanishads say. It's the narrow way, so Jesus and the Tao Te Ching tell us. It's the Middle Way, the Buddha declares.

Yes, the Middle Way, between the Two Extremes, the Buddha says. YHWH between the Two Cherubim, the Torah states. Truth does not, cannot, take sides. On the one side I have Christianity and my conservative upbringing - my family and conservative friends. On the other side I have Secularism, other religions, and my liberal ("progressive") friends. It's like I'm a child of divorced parents, searching for reconciliation between the two. Both try to manipulate me to take their side.

When I see the profound truths of secularism and non-Christian Religion and do not speak it for fear of what Christians might think, I am not a servant of Truth. When I see profound truths in Christian thought and I do not speak it for fear of offending non-Christians, I am not a servant of truth. Find the truth in EVERYTHING, and leave the rest. ALL truth is One Truth. When we know truth and don't speak it for fear of what somebody thinks, are we worthy of having a spine and walking upright?

For years I have basked in the light of secularism and the non-Christian world and Eastern Religion, because I saw that it had more integrity and honesty in it. But all this time I have seen layers upon layers of profound truth in Christianity, and profound wisdom in Christians, including my parents. But I have been afraid to speak it for fear of being categorized with the Jerry Falwells and Pat Robertsons and the Crusades and the we're-right-and-everybody-else-is-wrong mentality.

Jack Kerouac and Dharma Bums

Jack Kerouac's Dharma Bums is so popular you can rarely find a copy in the library that's not checked-out or stolen. I've found that when I just talk about wandering moneyless and my ponderings in Eastern religious thought, people out there lap it up. But as soon as I relate it to the teachings of Jesus, I lose one audience and gain another - the Christian audience. Seems to be an either or. Then I get attached to my new audience and find myself in fear of losing this Christian audience, so I keep the profound truths of Eastern Religion under my hat. Yet I know in my deepest heart that Enlightenment or Salvation or whatever you want to call it is exactly the same thing in Hinduism as it is in Christianity. Exactly.

Now a funny thing I've discovered is if you really want to turn off everybody, talk about Mormonism's deep truth. I have been astounded to find the most profound truth in the Book of Mormon. When I speak it, it goes over like a lead balloon. The rarest gems of all are the most hidden, least recognized - and most lost in hypocrisy.

Back to Dharma Bums. A couple years ago I read some published pages from Jack Kerouac's personal journal while he was on the road. They were all musings over New Testament passages, mainly Jesus' teachings. These were his main preoccupation! Yet we hear nothing of this in his books for the public. In his books for the public, it seems his main preoccupation is Zen Buddhism. He was divided, and I totally get why. Both Eastern and Western Religion are my constant preoccupation, because both are One. But to the public I become divided. But I am fairly certain that Jack Kerouac would not have died a lost alcoholic if he could have found the courage to state ALL of his mind, to not waste energy in trying to please one side. We must find reconciliation with every particle of the universe, leaving nothing out, if we are to find Divine Peace. It comes down to this: do we prefer popularity or Divine Peace?

Omnipresent Means Omnipresent

To Christians I will keep repeating: if you truly believe your own Christ, you will believe the Buddha, you will believe Krishna, you will believe Lao Tzu. If you do not keep Jesus' teachings, then you do not believe Jesus, and your "I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life" business is meaningless hot air. To Buddhists I will keep repeating, if you truly believe your own Buddha, you will believe the Christ. "Here, O Israel, YHWH your Elohim is One YHWH." Every Hebrew student knows that Elohim is plural, meaning Gods. Literally, Gods is One.

Evangelicals want to evangelize, proselytize. Really, that means all Christianity is evangelical - because that's its nature. But I have learned that to evangelize means Jesus' Golden Rule: "Do unto others what you would have them to do unto you," which more often than not means keeping your mouth shut and learning from others, not teaching. How do you feel when a Muslim tells you your religion is bullshit and his is the only right way? Don't you think he feels exactly the same when you tell him his religion is bullshit and yours the only right way? If you don't think Islam has something profound to teach you, you are not worthy to talk to a Muslim. It is Spirit we are spreading, not words. Spirit is Love. Buddhists and Hindus have taught me the depths of my own Christianity.

If God (Truth) is limited to one religion, then God is not, cannot be, Omnipresent. This is the common sense of all common sense.

Whoever you are - conservative, liberal, Christian, Hindu, Muslim, Animist, Atheist, Agnostic - my only challenge to you is to speak and act the truth that you know. Are you afraid to speak and act what you know because of what people might think? Are you afraid it will get you crucified? An atheist who speaks the truth as he knows it and gets nailed to a cross for it knows the Divine, though he thinks he doesn't. In Jesus' parable of the 2 sons, one son has the actions and not the words and the other has the words and not the actions. Which do you think is a child of the Kingdom of God? (Matthew 21:28-31). The goats think they are righteous and are not, while the sheep think they are not righteous and are (Matthew 25:31-45).

Here is the Gift of the universe: when you speak and act what you know, what you do not know becomes revealed to you.

Buddha means Awakened
Jesus the Buddha
Awakened from Sleep
Resurrected from Death

When one is Awakened
All are Awakened
Simultaneously
Beyond Time

What if Socrates' Students Filled Out Teaching Evaluations?

I just got the results back from last semester's teaching evaluations. They weren't bad, but they were a bit lower than I'd hoped. Some of it was teaching two new classed, and some was having a new population to work with - each student body is different, with different backgrounds, experiences, and expectations.

Each time I've been at a new school, my student evaluations have been between a half point and three quarters of a point lower (on a five point scale) than they are in subsequent semesters. I generally get pretty good evaluations, and part of it is that I view teaching as not just the transmission of facts but also as a performance. But I always need to adjust the performance for the audience.

So, since I was in a student evaluation frame of mind, I got a kick out of this piece from the Chronicle of Higher Education titled "Hemlock In the Classroom." It asks "what would students say on their evaluations if they had Socrates as a professor?" Here are some of the better parts:

This class on philosophy was really good, Professor Socrates is sooooo smart, I want to be just like him when I graduate (except not so short). I was amazed at how he could take just about any argument and prove it wrong.

I would advise him, though, that he doesn't know everything, and one time he even said in class that the wise man is someone who knows that he knows little (Prof. Socrates, how about that sexist language!?). I don't think he even realizes at times that he contradicts himself. But I see that he is just eager to share his vast knowledge with us, so I really think it is more a sin of enthusiasm than anything else.

...Socrates is a real drag, I don't know how in hell he ever got tenure. He makes students feel bad by criticizing them all the time. He pretends like he's teaching them, but he's really ramming his ideas down student's throtes. He's always taking over the conversation and hardly lets anyone get a word in.

He's sooo arrogant. One time in class this guy comes in with some real good perspectives and Socrates just kept shooting him down. Anything the guy said Socrates just thought he was better than him.

...My first thought about this class was: this guy is really ugly. Then I thought, well, he's just a little hard on the eyes. Finally, I came to see that he was kind of cute. Before I used to judge everyone based on first impressions, but I learned that their outward appearances can be seen in different ways through different lenses.

I learned a lot in this class, especially about justice. I always thought that justice was just punishing people for doing things against the law and stuff. I was really blown away by the idea that justice means doing people no harm (and thanks to Prof. Socrates, I now know that the people you think are your enemies might be your friends and vice versa, I applied that to the people in my dorm and he was absolutely right).

Read the whole thing Here

HT: Daniel Drezner, who probably uses the Socratic method in his classes.

Thursday Link Dump

Since I took yesterday off to see a matinee, today is a research day, with lots of statistical and computing goodness in store (mmmmm, data).

So, here are some links to keep you busy while I torture data:

With the election cycle starting to heat up a bit, I'll probably be logging more often about prediction markets. Slate.com has a short guide to them if you're interested.

According to a UBS Investment Bank study, acquisitions of high market/book targets perform better.

Joe Carter at Evangelical Outpost has posted the latest installment of his Yak Shaving Razor Series.

For you movie buffs, Craig Newmark has a transcript of Danny Devito's classic speech as Larry The Liquidator in Other people's Money.

Dan Melson at Searchlight Crusade has written an excellent guide to shopping of a mortgage. Read it - the advice on his blog has saved me thousands of dollars. Hey - I may be a finance professor, but he lives with this stuff every day.

Enough bloggery. Back to work.

The 300 - A Fine Movie

Since I've had a pretty good week (and it's Spring Break here at Unknown University), I treated myself to a viewing of The 300. It was well worth every penny.

It's definitely not one to take your kids to (and probably not your wife either). It had its share of gore, but that was to be expected from adaption of a Frank Miller graphic novel (and about war, yet. So get over it).. But even that didn't seem as bad as you would have expected because of the somewhat otherworldly lighting and colorization they used.

I know, I know - the Spartans weren't nearly as honorable and praiseworthy in real life as they were depicted in the movie. Some of them were gay, and they were not nice in reality. And I can see how you could read political or racist overtones into the plot. But then, if you want to you can probably read them into just about anything.

But having said that, I can see why the movie has done as well as it has. It's not just that the camera work and special effects were striking (they were). And it's not because it was pretty violent and gory (it was).

Honor, respect, and courage are the themes of the movie. The Spartans depicted in the movie were the epitome of what used to be called "Stand up guys". They were willing to fight and die for a cause, and they went through it all with a definitely guyish and dark sense of humor. I particularly liked the scene at the end when Leonidas tells the traitor Ephialtes "may you live forever", as in "you don't deserve an honorable death in battle." A few people in the audience actually clapped and cheered at that point.

There are a lot of people who still go for those things in movies. And we're not all testosterone-drenched yahoos (at least, we're not JUST those things). So if you like a good guys movie, devfinitely see this on the big screen. I only wish there was an IMAX near me so I could have gotten the full visual effect.

Another Paper Finished

I made another step toward clearing out my backlog of unfinished papers today. I had a small project that's been in the works for a couple of years. For some reason, it kept getting pushed to the back burner by one coauthor or another (and more often than not, it was me doing the pushing).

This week, we finally said "enough", and we did the necesary work to finish the darn thing. I just finished the "final" rewrite and sent it to my coauthors. All they need to do is check to make sure that the sections I rewrote don't have any serious errors (grammatical or otherwise). So, it should get submitted sometime this week. All in all, it makes for a pretty good start to Spring Break.

And that will bring me up to three papers under review (all submitted this semester). Then I'll be in compliance with Mungo's Rule.

As an aside, the paper that got rejected earlier this week has already been sent out to another journal.

And as a reward, I think I'll check out the matinee showing of The 300 tomorrow.

Hillary / Vote Different Video

I try to stay away from politics on this blog since so many people get so vaporated about the topic that rational discussion becomes almost impossible. But I just saw the anti-Hillary Vote Different video on YouTube and had to comment.

For those of you who don't recognize it, it's a very clever riff on the classic Ridley Scott 1984 Apple ad. What makes it so interesting is that it probably didn't come from the Obama campaign. Most likely someone hacked it together on their home computer (probably a Mac). I think that YouTube will change a lot of the way political attack material gets spread.

And for what it's worth, I'm a supporter of neither Hillary nor Obama.

Size Matters (if it's an interval) When Studying Market Efficiency

Here's a VERY interesting piece that all researchers on market efficiency and predictability should read. It's by titled "The Interval of Observation" by Jacobsen, Marshall, and Visaltanachoti of Massey University, and it has some pretty nice findings. Here's the abstract:

We revisit Kendall's (1953) conclusion that "the interval of observation may be very important". Contrary to his other conclusions on return predictability, this conclusion has received surprisingly little attention. Most tests in finance and economics routinely regress daily, weekly and monthly observations on daily, weekly and monthly observations, respectively. This is especially surprising because, while convenient, this convention lacks economic reasoning in many applications. Using similar data to Kendall (commodity prices and US, UK and World Stock Market indices) we show how conclusions regarding stock market return predictability vary drastically once we deviate from this convention. Even more surprising: conclusions whether or not stock returns are predictable fluctuate strongly for almost similar intervals of observation. In other words, had the "Demon of Chance" in 1953 offered Kendall slightly different intervals of observation, Kendall might have concluded that stock market returns were predictable.

Read the whole thing here.

Essentially, they find that while many series don't exhibit predictable behavior when using the prior month's return (one of the "standard" intervals used by researchers) as a predictor, they do when using other less standard but equally defensible interval lengths.

The key take-away of the paper is not that markets are necessarily predictable (or even that they're not), but that the choice of interval can make HUGE differences in the results.

HT: Financeprofessor.com