Emergency Fund

EMERGENCY FUND

It is highly recommended by renowned financial analysts, and people in the business of money and finance, for every family, every individual, to have an emergency fund. The parameters of the emergency fund may differ depending on what financial consultant or financier’s principles you ascribe to. Some recommend that a family should have enough money in reserve, or in their emergency fund to last one year. This specified amount includes one year’s worth of expenses; including mortgage, rent, household bills, food, etc.

For some, the idea of having a years salary or a years worth of expenses saved up seems an impossibility; particularly in today’s economy. Other money managers prescribe timeframes that are shorter in duration, but the concept never changes. I’m sure we have all had family members who have said, “Put something away for a rainy day”.

This seems like sage advice particularly in times of economic disparity. It is not too much of a cognitive leap to consider that if having a storehouse, or an emergency fund in economic times of crisis is a good idea, then having spiritual stores, and an emergency fund of spiritual resources is a good idea as well.
Very often, economic crisis and spirituality find themselves intersecting. When people are hurting, can’t see their way clear, don’t know where the next house payment or next meal will come from, they cry out to a Higher power for divine intervention. Even those who profess no particular faith, and even those who consider faith the frivolous notions of the masses, in times of crisis, find themselves crying out “Oh Lord!” ‘Oh God!”

Consider this. When the economy is flourishing, instead of spending aimlessly, put something away in the emergency fund. When times are good and blessings seem abundant, put something away in your spiritual storehouse. We all know how difficult to save when crisis actually strikes. Be a good steward of plenty, so that in times of famine the crisis is diminished.

So, what do you have in your emergency fund?

Driving Under Influenced !!

By the title of this, you can tell that once again I had an epiphany while driving. I am going to start calling them EWD’s. I’m sure you have noticed that near major holidays, or extended weekends, the signs appear on the roads and the commercials show on television about the importance of not driving under the influence. Sometimes the commercials and warning signs on the road describe in more specific detail what driving under the influence means. They talk about driving under the influence of illicit substances, particularly alcohol.

What accompanies these not so gentle warnings is the increased police presence on the roads. Please don’t swerve, change lanes without signaling properly, or drive more than the allotted speed limit, for if you do, then you stand an increased chance of being pulled over on the side of the road by your local law enforcement agency. There is another accompaniment to this more than seasonal dance --- the designated driver. For if you determine or someone else determines for you that you are not capable of limiting your intake and then having sound judgment when it comes to your mode of transportation, than a friend of local bartender will make the decision to provide you some much needed assistance. The irony however, in the designated driver is that the person under the influence has to summon up enough common sense to acquiesce and allow another person or force to determine their safety and destiny.

So once again, I am in my car, contemplating this notion of driving under the influence. And then it dawned on me…. What about DRIVING UNDER INFLUENCED?

What ever does this kind of DUI mean? More times than not, I have arrived at a particular familiar destination, without giving a lot of thought to how I have gotten there. It’s sort of like moving from one place to another on automatic pilot. Then I thought, “No, that’s not what I think I mean by DRIVING UNDER INFLUENCED. So after a few more miles, and given a little more thought to the original connotation of the DUI, it became increasingly clearer to me. DRIVING UNDER INFLUENCED – the absence of influence. Movement without influence; activity without influence; thinking without influence, contemplation without influence. Driving under influenced.

Influence has been defined by Webster’s dictionary as a power affecting a person, thing, or course of events, especially one that operates without any direct or apparent effort. WOW! That bears repeating: A power affecting a person, thing of course of events, especially one that operates without any direct or apparent effort. Then follows the AHA moment. To drive under influenced means to operate without this affective power; without the impact on the person, thing of course of events; and to exist in abstentia from this force that has the ability to change, challenge, and indeed influence effortlessly.
Now, it is not for me to say what this influential power or lack thereof, is in your season. Call it what you will, but it sounds to me like living without this influential power is a negative versus a positive. To move without influence, to be without influence sounds like the absence of really moving and BEING.

So yes, there will continue to be warning about driving under the influence, and for some, the connotation and understanding of this notion will remain the same. But for others, DUI will never have the same secular, simplistic meaning again. For those who understand the power of this oxymoronic notion and flight of thought and fancy, their daily goal will be to drive under the influence; moving under the power of an effortless will that leads and guides to purpose. For those who recognize the message in the words, the goal of everyday life is to drive under the influence, because DRIVING UNDER INFLUENCED is to live without inspiration, meaning, or acceleration. Driving under influenced is to live without purpose.

Compartmentalized Brilliance

You, like me, have met people in your life who have demonstrable brilliance that seems to be regulated to one, maybe two areas of their life. Even people frequently referred to as ‘idiot savants’ exhibit extraordinary skills in oftentimes a creative area of their lives that provides an ironic juxtaposition to what has been defined as their developmental limitations. The ability to masterfully play the piano, but be unable to read music; the gift of etching life on a page, yet being unable to define colors; the stealth to hear a concerto and repeat it verbatim, without the ability to spell c-o-n-c-e-r-t-o; compartmentalized brilliance.

The compartmentalization of brilliance is not relegated to those with savant syndrome. It happens in those who have not been defined in terms of operating with developmental limitations who have a hot spot of brilliance. It happens to the best of us. To be able to cook a savory meal without a recipe; measuring in the chef’s hand without using the contemporary tools of a chef; determining tastes by how the ingredients feel; versus perfectly measuring out to ensure that not too much of one thing and not enough of another are imparted into the dish. The ability to dissect a mechanical problem, determined by the inappropriate sound the engine is making; ears tuned to the rumble of the components, and peeked when something doesn’t sound quite right; correcting the problem, with oil stained hands, worn out tools, and no written instruction or the reassurance of a trained mechanics watchful eye. Even something so simple as calculating the cost of groceries as one shops in the store; not writing it down, but balancing the checkbook – adding and subtracting, down to the penny, so as not to go over budget.

These are all things that ordinary people do everyday without giving it a second thought. This bisected brilliance is taken for granted by some, and is often unrecognized by most. They are lovingly referred to as the meanest cook in the family, the shade tree mechanic, the frugal one, ‘the one with the good credit’.

It has oft been said by those with extensive research credentials, and multiple letters and commas behind their names that most humans only use 10% of their brains capacity. What if, because we know this and accept it as fact, we individually decide to stretch the parameters of our own compartmentalized brilliance? What if there was a collective decision to use 20%, 30%, God forbid, 50% of the magnanimous power that has been given to us in the form of intelligence. What difference would that make in our lives? Would there be limits to the feats we could accomplish, the tasks undertaken and conquered, the depths of dreams no longer deferred? Most importantly, the compartmentalization removed, eliminates all excuses of what one can’t do; it decreased the comfort of staying within the knowing; forcing the widening of the eye, and the expansion of the mind to heights unknown.

If this decompartmentalization process was then broadened to every facet of our human selves; not only intelligence, but feelings, emotions, physicality, spirituality, what then? What then would be the result of decompartmentalized brilliance?

Fenced In

On a recent vacation with my children, I had the opportunity to observe the landscape as I drove. Between the beautiful sky, trees in the midst of colorful transition and the sprawling fields that seemed to never end, there was an oft repeated theme. What, you may ask? Intermittently dispersed over the landscape were little enclaves of fenced cattle.
The cattle were of various colors and sizes; with males and females adequately represented. Some were even longhorns, frequently associated with the Texas longhorns. Some of the cattle were huge, easily weighing several hundred pounds. What was striking to me was not the sheer girth of these animals, nor the sheer numbers of cattle that could be seen in what appeared to be a rather small pasture. What was striking is regardless of the aforementioned factors, these animals were all held behind minimal fencing! Some of the fences were made from chain link; but more than not, the fencing was wooden stakes with some form of linkage running between. Rarely did I see barb wired fencing (like the kind that keeps criminals at bay). Some of the fences that I saw had wooden posts that were leaning, and fencing, regardless of the material, that was dipping, as it had not been pulled taut across the posts. Mind you, despite the materials, none of the fencing was such that it blocked the view from any passerby of neither the animals nor the fields they grazed in. The fences seemed see through.

I began to think about this premise as I drove across the countryside. These animals were massive. Had either one of them decided that the grass was truly greener on the other side of the fence, all it would have taken was to lean against the fencing and they would have that desired access. They would be free to eat, and graze in that greener pasture. Moreover, if there was such a thing as collective thought amongst these beasts of burden, a small number of them could trample the very fencing that was holding them in. The most striking visual was of a cow who had peeked it’s head through the fencing, and was actually nibbling grass from outside the enclosure! You could tell that this was no easy feet. There was some effort and even strain involved in securing the object that the animal sought.

This rather mundane visual context proved striking and profound to me as I drove. I began to wonder and think about the objects or things or the self that had me fenced in. What was keeping me from attaining the object of my desire that seemed to be right outside of my grasp? Was I like the animal who accepted their fate, by a fence that was leaning, that would take minimal effort to trample? Did I even know that I was fenced in? And was I so comfortable in my current condition that the thought of leaning on the weakened fence never crossed my mind, or the collective minds of those around me? Or was I more like the animal that was reaching through the fence, striving to reach the object of my desire? Yes, there was some struggle and strain involved, and it took great effort to reach, but the reward was perceived to be great enough to justify the effort?

And what if the fence that the animal was reaching through to reach the greener grass was barb wired or even electrical. Would I still be the one reaching through the fence at this level of risk? Contemplation of this fencing in has been an important and clarifying process for me. Have you considered what has you fenced in?