Miss Buddha

by Ulf Wolf

  “Well, you should have,” said Simmons. With teeth.

  Jones said nothing.

  “I have received another request,” said Callahan, addressing Simmons. “From your boss.”

  “I know,” said Simmons.

  “Are you serious?” said Jones. “You’ve failed, twice. Or is it three times?”

  “Bottom line,” said Callahan. “She cannot be allowed to keep this up. Exonerated, like this, she will carry more weight. It is a disaster to end all disasters.”

  Simmons nodded her agreement. Could not have been worse.

  “There is far too much attention now,” said Jones. “Any attempt on her life will draw intense media scrutiny. It could backfire beyond repair.”

  “We’re already beyond repair,” Simmons pointed out, thanks to Jones.

  Callahan, who now had no further doubts as to why he was there, said, “We’ll need a month at least. It will have to be meticulously planned, and can only involve our most trusted.”

  “We don’t have a month,” said Simmons. “A week, at best.”

  “You are not serious,” said Jones.

  “I am completely serious,” said Simmons.

  “It cannot be done in a week,” said Callahan.

  “Then we’ll find someone who can do it in a week,” said Simmons.

  Callahan had gotten to where he had gotten mostly due to his reputation as the Los Angeles go-to guy in all sorts of situations. Failure to step up now and be counted would have serious career repercussions, he knew that. Still.

  “Two weeks?” he said.

  “One week,” said Simmons.

  Callahan heard himself agreeing. “Okay, one week.”

  “And no screw-ups this time,” said Simmons.

  “You are not serious,” said Jones.

  “One week,” said Simmons.

  “One week,” said Callahan.

  :

  George Roth not only predicted that this meeting would take place, he also had a pretty good idea where it would take place. Based on his analysis, it would take place in any one of three locations, and he had all three covered both with hyper-sensitive long-distance microphones and very good photo-video lenses.

  He had chosen to man the most likely spot himself: a forty-third floor corner room in a Century City high-rise. It was a little known fact that the Bureau owned the entire floor, and this particular corner room was set aside exclusively for unofficial high level conferences such as these.

  Roth being the predictor of events that he was had guessed right.

  From a nearby roof, and even across a distance of five hundred feet, his microphones nonetheless picked up the voice reverberations in the glass panes surrounding those talking, and so managed to record a faithful rendition of the proceedings, each person clearly identifiable, while the high-power lens faithfully recorded a serviceable high definition video of the three attendees in conference.

  As evidence went, this was as damning as it came.

  :: 138 :: (Los Angeles)

  George Roth leaked the video and sound recording of the FBI/Pharma conference to the major networks, all of whom led the evening news with the story.

  Watching the coverage, Ananda Wolf hovered somewhere between immense relief and horror at the thought.

  This particular broadcast began with the footage of Ruth Marten in Berlin, standing up the one moment and the next prone on the stage. “This attempt,” the voice-over said, “was obviously also orchestrated by the FBI and BIA collusion.” The next sound-bite being what amounted to a clear admission from the recorded conference: “Or as Otto Jones put it: ‘You’ve failed, twice. Or is it three times?’ Clearly, the U.S. Government is involved in attempts to assassinate Ruth Marten. Clearly the FBI has made several attempts, and clearly, the pharmaceutical giant BIA is pulling some sort of strings to make Uncle Sam jump so quickly—and clumsily.”

  George Roth, who was visiting, afforded himself a smile. “Pretty darn good, if I may say so myself.”

  “But,” said Melissa, ever the mother. “Do you think that this will make them back off?”

  “First,” said Roth. “We’ll see the fallout in terms of dismissals. My guess is that this will go all the way to the head of the service. It will also involve a serious congressional inquiry into the extent to which Big Pharma is calling the Washington shots. After that, it would be easier to assess the likelihood of other attempts. My guess, though—my gut-feeling—is that we’ll see no more of this. Ruth’s profile is now far too high, the Government’s and Pharma’s involvement far too known.”

  “I wish I could take that to the bank,” said Melissa.

  “I think you can,” said Ruth.

  The next report again played the highlights from the videoed meeting, again referring to the source as “unnamed.”

  Ananda turned to Roth, “I don’t think we can thank you enough,” he said.

  “My pleasure,” said Roth. “I am very glad to have been of service.”

  “Invaluable service,” confirmed Ruth.

  :: 139 :: (Pasadena)

  Seeing Ananda smile again warms my heart. Then he notices me noticing and he looks down, as if embarrassed to be caught in such a personal act.

  Then he looks up again, still smiling. Relaxing, finally.

  Though he will, on some level, still worry about me—that seems to be part of his very makeup—I see that he, too, believes all will be okay now.

  I look over at George Roth, who certainly has good reason to seem pleased with himself. Truth is, I cannot thank him enough, and I will do all I can to help him along the path.

  Melissa, my mother, seems asleep, leaning back into the sofa cushion and closing her eyes. But she’s not asleep, she’s more like waking up from a dark dream, finally over. She senses me looking at her and opens her eyes. And just like Ananda, smiles.

  On the television some other channel is replaying George’s clever recording and I can hear a call for independent investigations and several resignations. True, I have not made friends in some very high places, but we have also flushed the enemy to enlightenment out into the open, for all to see.

  It seems, and every cell in my body sings the same tune, that my mission will succeed.

  :: 140 :: (USC)

  The world economy is a resilient creature. Yes, demand for luxury goods has dropped dramatically and continues to fall. But new industries burgeon. The call for healthier food, simpler clothing and furniture is rising, and many manufacturers are all too happy to oblige.

  Even the larger pharmaceutical companies are seeing some sort of writing on some sort of wall and have begun to shift their research and production capacities toward vitamins and other food supplements: the customer is, after all, Kind and Queen in this game of supply and demand, and the world is responding accordingly.

  The public’s disobedience, its refusal to clamor for more and more and more did not bring the world to its knees, but seems to have infused it with a new, cleaner life.

  Ruth Marten provides a brief overview of this during her USC morning lecture, to applause.

  At the end of the lecture, she again invites questions and the first one—from a young post-graduate woman—is the one question she has always refused to answer.

  “Miss Marten. I know I should probably not ask this, but I feel I must: Are you the Buddha returned?”

  Ruth smiles, and finally does answer that question.

  ::

  Part Four — Thesis

  Thesis:

  Science, Philosophy, and Religion —

  Shared Ground, Shared Goal

  by Ruth Marten

  :: One Truth ::

  Ultimately, there is only one truth. There cannot be two, or many, ultimate truths. Things are, and came to be a certain way; and the truth about how existence arrived at this moment is singular: it is the way existence arrived here, proven by the plain fact that it has indeed arrived precisely here.

  There can only be one single way that
things—no matter how complex or complicated they may appear—came to be and now are.

  True, there are many views on that subject as well: are things? Do they exist or are we just imagining them in a narcissistic universe where we perceive nothing but our own dreams? Some see it that way.

  I maintain, however—as do most observers—that things do exist; objectively (un-interpreted) as well as subjectively (interpreted).

  And these many things that are, they are a certain way; by reason of existing they exist the way they exist and no other way.

  Things are not two certain ways. They are a single certain way. And they arrived at their current state of being by a certain series of events, by a certain path, a certain way, not via two, or three, or four certain ways, but one certain way—and here I place profound stress on the two words “certain” and “way.”

  Reality, as we perceive it, consists, among other things, of bodies and blood and stars and skylarks and grass and hastily assembled tables and ice cream and painted fingernails. We perceive these things and we say that they are. And they are a certain way.

  Perhaps we do dream them in some vast communal slumber, but if that is the case, then that is the way things are. Or perhaps a Capital-G God created all things, well, if that is the case then that is precisely the single certain way they came to be. Or perhaps all things are conjured by a man named Thornton in Philadelphia, and if so, well, that is the one certain lay of the land.

  Perhaps, you say—playing the Devil’s advocate—reality is conjured by two men, Thornton in Philadelphia and a certain William in Bern, Switzerland. Perhaps. But if so, then that is the one certain way that things are.

  Perhaps, you say, this is just one of a million, million parallel universes, and we only perceive one trillionth of what really is. Again, if so, then that is the one certain way that things are, simply because that, then, is the true state of affairs.

  Man has always been curious about the way things are and how they came to be just that way, and has over the years, and by various means and approaches, looked into this to find out more about it.

  One study of the way things are is called Science.

  One study of the way things are is called Philosophy.

  One study of the way things are is called Religion.

  And this is what they share, their common space: they seek the Capital-T Truth about the way things are, and how they came to be.

  Ultimately, these three paths seek the same thing: Truth.

  Wisdom.

  :: The Words ::

  Man has long been in the habit of labeling those things he has by one channel or another experienced, first by sounds, later by spoken words, and finally by written words. He has also a long-standing habit of collecting things in one place so, if you want to assess the current state of mankind, the easiest and most direct way to do so is to consult the dictionary.

  In there you will find most, if not all, things Man has experienced. In fact, it is not seldom that you discover that the dictionary knew all about it all along. And that being the case, let’s turn to it first.

  Science, philosophy, religion? What was it Man decided these labels was to represent?

  Science

  The path named science acquired its meaning around the year 1340 CE when science meant knowledge, a branch of learning, a skill.

  Etymologically, the word was borrowed from Old French science which, in turn, was borrowed from Latin scientia, meaning knowledge, from sciens, the present participle of scire, meaning to know, which in turn, originally, meant to separate, divide; a word related to scindere, meaning to cut, split.

  This, in my view, is as good a take on the word as can be for isn’t that what we do when we study things? We separate one thing from another in order to analyze. Cut things up to examine the pieces. We discriminate, we differentiate. One piece from another.

  Science.

  The modern, restricted, sense of the word as a branch of learning based on observation and tested truths, arranged in an orderly system, was first recorded in Isaac Watt’s Logic (1725), and had by then developed from meaning a particular branch of knowledge—such as logic, grammar, rhetoric, arithmetic, geometry, astronomy—as distinguished from art (which, in many views is yet another path to finding out how things are), into its current meaning.

  Science, then, today, is the path of observing, closely—by dissecting and otherwise cutting apart into constituent factors—the observable. It is the approach that takes the road from the outside heading in.

  The fact that once we arrive all the way in (for a further discussion of this, please see my Particle Physics Doctoral Thesis—which in turn was based on my and Julian Lawson’s EPROM experiment) there is really nothing there (unless we look and expect to see something), does not invalidate neither the word nor the path.

  Science, as a discipline, when practiced honorably and with integrity, seeks the truth, seeks wisdom.

  Philosophy

  The path named philosophy acquired its meaning about forty years before science, around the year 1300, when as philosofie it meant knowledge, or a body of knowledge, or learning; later it grew into philosophye, to finally, a few hundred years later, settle on philosophy.

  This word was borrowed from Old French filosofie and later philosophie, which in its turn was borrowed from Latin. Some claim that the word was also borrowed directly from both the Latin philosophia, and the Greek philosophia. The Greek word was the original, and meant love or pursuit of knowledge or wisdom. It also meant speculation. Philo meant loving, sophia meant knowledge, learning, wisdom, from sophos wise, learned.

  Today, in my view, the word philosophy means, above all, love of wisdom; and wisdom, well, that is knowing the way things are, is it not?

  Philosophers down the ages have always been a community united by this love of wisdom, this hunger for truth. They have been united by the desire, the need—and the courage—to look, and to report what they saw, regardless of whose toes (mainly religious ones, if history serves) were treaded in the process.

  Some died for their vision. Giordano Bruno comes to mind. Others recanted what they had observed, and as a result managed to live a little longer, in inward shame—Galileo comes to mind, though his findings and views, recanted or not, were soon enough recognized as true.

  The Buddha, more than anything else, was a philosopher, as was Jesus of Nazareth, Muhammad, Rumi, Saint Augustine, Meister Eckhart, Spinoza, Bertrand Russell, and each and every man or woman who earnestly looked (or still look) the human condition in the eye and tried (or still try) to understand it.

  Philosophy, as a discipline, when practiced honorably and with integrity, seeks the Truth, aspires to Wisdom.

  Religion

  Again consulting the dictionaries, we find the path known as religion to be a little more constricted.

  It acquired English meaning as early as the year 1200 in the guise of religium which then referred to a religious order, or a community of monks or nuns. This word had made it across the channel from Old French religion, meaning, too, a religious community, which in turn was borrowed from the Latin religiare to bind fast, mostly by voicing a vow or obligation, and by that vow binding yourself to a fate or a belief.

  Today, a closely related word (a first cousin) is Theology which, of course, means “The Study of God,” from the Greek Theos, meaning God, and logos, meaning study).

  Both words, however, have the narrow scope of either subscribing to (binding yourself to) a certain faith or view (or later, dogma), or to a certain philosophical approach to truth (as in via an all-powerful Creator, God).

  Still, many of us relate the word to Truth, to the way things are, even if these ways that things are today come prepackaged for the most part.

  Each current world religion offers its own version of the Truth; something which held true for the Caveman’s worship of Fire, and still holds true for the modern Guru’s systematic approach to self-betterment (when this is cloaked in that word r
eligion).

  Most religions assume a Creator, though not the same one, and therefore tend to get into arguments, fights, wars, bloodshed with other religions whose Creator, just like yours, demands there be no other Creator beside Him (or Her).

  A sad testament to this is the fact that more humans lives have been shed and more human blood have been spilled in the name of such Creators than for any other reason.

  Some paths, such as Buddhism, are religions in name only and not in the sense of binding its followers to a fate. Such religions should more correctly be called philosophies, where what is true for you—and only that—is true.

  For all the Buddha ever told us to do is “Go look for yourself.”

  Each religion, at its fountainhead, saw an honest looking, an honest seeing, which was then communicated as well as the seer possibly could.

  Jesus was a seer. Muhammad was a seer. Lao Tzu was a seer. The Buddha was a seer. Zoroaster was a seer. Baha’ullah was a seer.

  But while seers see, their disciples and follower may—in fact, most often do—have dust in their eyes.

  Also, non-seers, or apprentice seers, or wishful-seers, those with little or much dust in their eyes tend to hold to a higher opinion of themselves than warranted by experience or accomplishment (making up, it appears, for such lack of experience or accomplishments), and wish to (in order to bolster their self-worth) put their own personal stamp on the seen by interpreting or commenting or expanding upon it (so that the rest of us, not-so-bright souls may understand as well).

  The true seer sees, the true understander understands and feels no need to comment or interpret, while the dusty eye must map and interpret and claim that his map of the labyrinth—and only his map—is the correct one.

  This is how religions derail.

  But I believe that we can truly say that religion, as a discipline, when practiced honorably and with integrity, also seeks the Truth, seeks Wisdom.