“Are we witnessing the second coming of the Buddha?” asked Stephen Colbert in the opening tease of Monday night’s Report. “I’ll believe it when I see it in my grilled cheese sandwich.”

So, Nation, what was it that Colbert was talking about? A run-down and video follow. (more…)

I’m a little late on this one, being that I’m just back from a meditation retreat — it’s best, they say, to take a little time before jumping onto one’s email, etc, to make your post-retreat “re-entry” a bit easier. But when I saw that my dharma-brother-from-a-different mother Konchog Norbu had sent me an email that said, simply, “This one’s for the Horse,” with a link, I had to open it.

And so here it is, “Jessica Simpson Loses It in Buddhist Temple,” a scene from the singer and pretty person’s new show, in which she tries to learn what beauty means to various cultures:

You know, though, I can’t really say anything bad about this. At least she went. And hey, I can’t say I was much better in more than a couple of moments during this past weekend! So, yes, this one really is for The Worst Horse — and by that I mean, the worst horse in all of us. Because we all have “a little more work to do.”

With the news that the complete run of The Larry Sanders Show is coming to DVD this September, now seems like fine time to re-present this appreciation of the show from The Worst Horse archives.

This piece was written before the news (2008, to be exact), and so it presents a view of the Show (and its creator-star, Garry Shandling) based on the previously released Not Just the Best of the Larry Sanders Show DVD set.] But all the main points about Larry and Garry apply. So enjoy.

For better or worse, many of us have got our favorite Dharma books and trinkets. Well, I’ve got a new one: the four-disc DVD-set, Not Just the Best of the Larry Sanders Show.

If you’re surprised that some DVDs could become so instantly near and dear as, say, an inscribed book from a teacher or the Manjushri statue that a dear friend gave me (and which is watching me from its perch next to my monitor), that makes two of us. But hear me out.

For those who don’t know: The Larry Sanders Show was one of the funniest, smartest shows ever on TV, period. (You only have to Google to see how widely-shared that opinion is.) The brainchild of the genius comedian Garry Shandling, Larry was a send-up of late-night TV, tracking the life and death of a Tonight-style show and its host, the neurotic but lovable — and very funny — Larry Sanders. But Larry and his staff of competitive LA producers, handlers, and lackeys were, above all, human. All that neurosis and competition make for some cringe-worthy comedy, sure. But there’s a lot of innocence to it all somehow. And once you’ve finished watching the final episode (the last of 23 included in the set) you just might be a little choked up. These fictional — and, again, very funny — people are somehow very real.

That’s by design. Authenticity — being true to the way people actually think, act, and treat each other — plays a major role in the show. “It’s like taking a Buddhist temple bell,” Shandling says, “an authentic, two-thousand year old Buddhist temple bell, and ringing it and going, ‘Can you tell me why that rings so purely?’ [It's] because it’s the real thing.”

“All these people in show business are human beings,” Shandling says.

Shandling, it turns out, is all about The Real Thing. The comedian started the show to, in his words, “discover more, Who am I?” (Director Todd Holland backs this up, saying that “Garry’s obsession is to truly expose the truth about himself.”)

All of this is in line with what might be a surprising element of Shandling’s psychological makeup. He’s not just some whiny comedian. He’s a searcher, on a journey to find The Real Thing, and the Real Garry Shandling, in what might seem one of the most unlikely places — Hollywood. He’s a Worst Horse.

It’s in the DVD’s extras that you’ll find the most enlightening moments about the key player on both sides of the camera: in candid visits with his guest-star friends, Shandling reveals an appealingly meditative side. A longtime mindfulness practitioner in Thich Nhat Hanh’s tradition, the comedian used these get-togethers not just to catch up with the people he loves, but to make that love plain.

He’s humble when it comes to talking about his practice — it’s not “Hey, look at me.” It’s “Hey, can you help me look at myself?” On Disc One, in talking to former flame Sharon Stone, he offers that he’s keeping up his practice, just before telling her how important she remains to him. On Disc Four, he shows his friend and neighbor Tom Petty his previously private Dharma-tattoo, an enso (or “Zen circle”) inked onto the back of the comedian’s neck to remind him of his work towards, as he says, “ego-emptiness.” And while Shandling laments the camera’s presence at least a couple of times, it’s also clear that he’s trying to be open, to be willing to say and hear things about himself — no matter how intimate. By most accounts, including his own, this is new. His practice is becoming truly integrated with his life.

There are a couple more outward indicators of the Dharma’s influence in Shandling’s life strewn throughout the discs. For example, in a reunion in his real-life living room with the show’s two comedic iron-men — Rip Torn, who played Arthur, Larry’s producer and protector; and Jeffrey Tambor, who, as Sanders’s on-screen sidekick Hank Kingsley, brought the nonsensical catchphrase “Hey now!” into the pop-culture vernacular — we catch a glimpse of Buddhist prayer flags. But it’s in the reflective words of the cast and crew that we get a more concrete sense of how Garry’s drive to get at The Real Thing informs not only his life, but those around them. Tambor, for example, captures this in describing how he was able to make his performance as Hank ring true, no matter how outrageous the scene. When he reveals that “the secret to everything [is,] don’t think,” it’s not a big leap to infer that he’s probably learned how to do this from his friend Garry.

The DVD’s capping phrase comes in its final extra, a short visit with the monk Hann Nguyen, titled “The Journey Continues.” “The true [only] enemy,” as Nguyen tells Garry, “is ignorance.” Then, the screen quickly fades to black. It’s hardly the “last word” that you might expect from a retrospective of one of TV’s most notoriously snarky comedies.

But then, as Garry Shandling clearly knows: if you’ve got a sense of humor, you can find Dharma just about anywhere.

Really. This post is not about Tiger Woods.

If you saw Real Time With Bill Maher Friday night, or read the written version of his closing “New Rules” segment — which is more what this post is about — you might think this is about Tiger Woods, just like you might have thought it was just Woods (and, “sex addiction”) that Maher was talking about. But this is about Buddhism, and it’s about how people perceive and talk about it.

I’ve been getting some guff from people for covering the Tiger Woods/Buddhism affair on Shambhala SunSpace, here, and elsewhere. People think it’s “tabloidy” to cover it, that it’s all about celebrity. My argument, though, is that if the Buddhist media isn’t covering it, other media, who don’t necessarily understand Buddhism very well, will be framing the discussion of Buddhism. And that’s what Maher did with his “New Rule.”

And, as with the whole “Tiger Woods and/or Brit Hume” discussion, the reason it’s important to talk about such things is because, if we don’t, then the mistaken ideas that are put forth by media figures (well-meaning or not) are sure to remain out there, and to then be mistaken as not-incorrect by others.

I should say: I have a lot of admiration for Maher. I feel like his politics often represent my own, I think he’s uncommonly inventive and funny, I think he’s generally well-informed, and I admire his bravery; the man comes out and says things that people often just aren’t brave enough to say. (He’s also a damned good stand-up.) But some of the things he’s now said/wrote about Buddhism — much like what Howard Stern said the other day — are just plain off, satire or not, and should be addressed.

Or at least that’s how I see it. My question is, what about you?

Here are some excerpts of what Maher said. To be fair, you should really read all of what he said, for complete context, but here’s the ending, the part I wanted to address, for reference:

[Buddhism] really is outdated in some ways — the “Life sucks, and then you die” philosophy was useful when Buddha came up with it around 500 B.C., because back then life pretty much sucked, and then you died – but now we have medicine, and plenty of food, and iPhones, and James Cameron movies – our life isn’t all about suffering anymore. And when we do suffer, instead of accepting it we try to alleviate it.

Tiger said, “Buddhism teaches that a craving for things outside ourselves” makes us unhappy, which confirms something I’ve long suspected about Eastern religions: they’re a crock, too.

Craving for things outside ourselves is what makes life life — I don’t want to learn to not want, that’s what people in prison have to do. Buddhism teaches suffering is inevitable. The only thing that’s inevitable is that if you have fake boobs and hair extensions, Tiger Woods will try to fuck you.

And reincarnation? Really? If that were real, wouldn’t there be some proof by now? A raccoon spelling out in acorns, “My name is Herb Zoller and I’m an accountant.” …something?

People are always debating, is Buddhism a religion or a philosophy: it’s a religion. You’re a religion if you do something as weird as when the Buddhist monks scrutinize two-year-olds to find the reincarnation of the dude who just died, and then choose one of the toddlers as the sacred Lama: “His poop is royal!” Sorry, but thinking you can look at a babbling, barely-housebroken, uneducated being and say, “That’s our leader” doesn’t make you enlightened. It makes you a Sarah Palin supporter.

Again, as with what Stern said the other day — beyond also being the work of a professional humorist-slash-curmudgeon — there’s some fair reasoning to what Maher is saying here. On paper, from a non-Buddhist’s point of view, these are valid questions and points. But if you’re a Buddhist — and I’m not talking about being “offended” here — you just know that a lot of what Maher’s talking about is off the mark.

I won’t address it all here, but for example: whatever you do or don’t think about reincarnation, many Buddhists would agree that the more important hallmark of Buddhism is its capacity to help us to discover our capacity for re-birth, to help us wake to the way the world is in this moment, with an enhanced — less conditioned, more connected — clarity. Some Buddhists might place a strong emphasis on literal reincarnation, but all, I’d venture to say, are much more concerned with this very life we have now.

That’s a much more important point. Isn’t it?

And yes, the “medicine, food, iPhones, and James Cameron movies” that Maher holds up as examples of how we suffer less these days are very much part of many of our lives these days. Sounds like progress, for sure. But honestly, aren’t the latter two items in this list (as examples) more emblematic of how we escape from the down and dirty — but incredibly valuable — business of looking reality in the face? Don’t get me wrong; I love my gadgets and I love a good film. But how often do we dive into interfacing with these as ways to distant ourselves from others — and from the unsatisfactoriness we perceive in ourselves?

What Maher is missing, to my mind, is that what the Buddha — and so many who have learned from his example — discovered is that there is much to be gained from appreciating all of the aspects of life: the medicine, the movies, the difficult times, the quiet times. Because when the power goes out and you’re left without your iPhone or a movie-world to escape to, it’s a fine, fine thing to be able to be just as happy as you were before everything went black.

It’s not about “Life sucks and then you die.” It’s about, in the Buddha’s words, “suffering and the end of suffering.” And that’s always worth talking about.

Right?

Or am I losing my sense of humor?

Let me know. Thanks.

[By the way: as with many posts here on The Worst Horse, you'll also find this post on Shambhala SunSpace, where a bunch of other comments have come in.]

This might not be a popular notion to a lot of readers of The Worst Horse, but I listen to Howard Stern. Yes, I know all the many arguments people have against the show; I won’t recount them here. The fact is, I always used to have a love/hate relationship with the show — I loved it but wish I didn’t.

But Howard makes me laugh, is a brilliant interviewer, and since he’s moved from the wasteland that is terrestrial radio to Sirius satellite radio, he’s become a lot more loose, happy, and fun. Particularly interesting is how much he’s talked about his practice of Transcendental Meditation, and how it’s contributed to his happiness. I may do Buddhist meditation, but a lot of creative people I respect/enjoy do TM (Howard, David Lynch, Jerry Seinfeld, etc), so I’ve come to appreciate that it must work for them.

Anyway: Today Howard talked about Tiger Woods — something I was waiting all weekend for him to do. Now, Howard’s a satirist (among other things), so I can’t get too mad about the silly (and wrong) things he said in criticizing Wood’s evocation of Buddhism in his now-infamous media event on Friday.

For example: “Buddha? There’s only seven Buddhists in America. [...] But Tiger had to whip out some kind of god.” He also identified the Buddha as being “fat,” and criticized Siddhartha Gautama for leaving his home and family to pursue his path and teach it to those who found it useful.

Like I said, I’m, not willing to get mad at that — some of it’s understandable on some level — but I did figure I could try and address it. I tried and tried to call, but didn’t get thru. After about 400 rings of the phone (at least!), it was clear I should abandon speaking to him. So I wrote a letter to the show. For those who might care, that letter follows. (more…)

Yes, even PerezHilton.com posted this video, writing: “LOLs! In an attempt to attract new, younger followers to Buddhism, Buddhist monks in Japan are trying a new approach – rapping! Check out the HIGHlarity of the hip hop monks…” (And comments there have been positive, too, so far.)

What do you think of Mr. Happiness and his drink-pouring extended posse? The more traditional of us may balk, but he’s doubled attendance at his temple. Can you argue with those results? (And really, is this all so “HIGHlarious”?)

Have you seen it? It takes place in a sort of stand-in for the Potala Palace, completing the scene with prayer wheel, devotees and a levitating semi-Dalai Lamaesque figure. Meditation, it seems, is not necessary when you have Red Bull.

I can’t find the video online yet, but will post here when I do. You can see a screenshot, thankfully, thanks to good ol’ Many Flakes, One Bowl.

(BTW, “Many Flakes, One Bowl” has to be the best Buddhist blog name, no?)

Via ProbablyBadNews. He’s probably a very natural Zen student.

See the website of the great Beautiful/Decay magazine. And let the Horse know what you think.

Hat tip to kin.

Evening Update: SunSpace reader Jigme pointed me to a new WTOP interview with Hume from earlier this evening. The newsman doesn’t seem to slag Buddhism as he did in his first controversial statement, but he does “ramp up his pitch of the superiority of Christianity,” as USA Today puts it.

Hume also argues that it’s his Christian faith that has left him open to attack from those who misunderstand him: “Suppose I’d said that what Tiger needed to do was to deepen his practice of the Buddhist faith. You think we’d be discussing this today?”

Here’s a link to the audio. (Opens in new window.) Also, for those wondering what The Daily Show had to say in Tuesday night’s 11pm show:

The Daily Show pretty much led off with the Hume story. Correspondent Aasif Mandvi (a seemingly out-of-nowhere great) expressed sympathy for Hume, saying that he felt bad that Hume received negative messages in response to his comments via, as Mandvi described it, “the Internet — where, as far as I know, only nice things are said.” Mandvi, identifying himself as a practitioner of Islam, went on in his mock sympathy: “I forgot how hard it is to be Christian — because it’s so easy to be Muslim.”

That statement was then followed by a montage of clips of FOX News hosts and talking heads mocking Indians, suggesting that all young Muslim men should be strip-searched (at airports, one presumes), and generally, as Mandvi put it, “shitting on Hindus.”

As for The Colbert Report: Stephen Colbert’s go-to Buddhist, Lama Surya Das, did not appear (as I’d imagined he’d would). In fact, no mention of the Hume controversy took place. Instead, Colbert focused the bulk of his show on a post-Christmas-plane-bombing-attempt segment called “Nightmare of Terror: The Crapification of the American Pantscape.”

Great title, Stephen. But no coverage? What gives? A fella could use all the laughs he can get.