Miss Buddha (77 page)

“Yes it is. Ever since we began to perceive
the impact of Miss Marten’s promises on our congregations, we have
kept attendance records throughout Israel. These reports are
directly from the Jewish State Department, signed and sealed,
literally.”

“Signed and sealed by whom?” said Jones.

“By the Minister of the Interior and Public
Welfare.”

“So we can believe these figures.”

“Yes we can.”

“Now, have they established that Ruth Marten
is the cause for this falling off of attendance?”

“According to their best estimates, yes.
They have obviously not spoken to every person who has ceased to
attend services, but they have contacted and interviewed a
sufficient number to draw a statistically valid conclusion.”

“And that conclusion is?”

“That conclusion is that Ruth Marten’s
seditious sermons are the root of this problem.”

“No further questions, your honor.”

Judge Moore looked over at
Ruth. “Any questions of
this
witness, Miss Marten?”

“No, your honor,” said Ruth.

:

Jones’ third witness for the day was Aisha
Amiri, speaking for the Islam Religion. Jones had done some soul
searching before bringing her to the stand because the Muslim faith
was still a contentious issue among the general public and calling
on her might, however faintly, give the impression that the
prosecution was taking Islam’s side in whatever confrontations they
were currently involved in. This could cast him, and his case, in a
bad light with the jury, and the press.

In the end, though, he came down on the side
of the more the merrier, figuring that demonstration that no
religion, not even Islam, was immune to Ruth Marten’s negative
influence would outweigh any implied Muslim support on his
part.

So, here she was, more stunning than ever to
Jones, shrouded in a black, mysterious exterior (was that a black
sari?) hiding the equally mysterious interior, reflected by her
darker than night eyes and black waterfall of hair. She fascinated
him, always had.

Jones had made sure that the clerk used a
copy of the Koran rather than the Bible for the swearing, and he
was happy to see that there were no mix-ups in that department.
Then again, Judge Moore would also have seen to that.

“Miss Amiri,” said Jones. And did not
continue until the woman looked up at him. “Miss Amiri,” he
repeated. “You are well briefed, and kept up-to-date about the
impact, if any, of Ruth Marten’s lectures on the attendance in your
mosques. Would that be a correct statement?”

“Yes,” she answered. “That would be a
correct statement.”

“This being the case, what is Ruth Marten’s
impact on the attendance, if any?”

“As of two days ago, the nationwide
impact—and by nationwide I mean the United States—of Miss Marten’s
lectures on our attendance appears to be a thirty percent drop,
give or take a point.”

“Appears?” said Jones.

“We have not verified her as the cause with
every single non-attendee,” said Amiri.

“But you have verified it with some?”

“We have verified this drop in attendance
with a sufficient number of Muslims to render the number
statistically reliable,” she answered.

Jones liked matter-of-factness. A lot. So
did Judge Moore.

“How many wayward attendees
have you interviewed?” said Jones, and, seeing Amiri frown,
immediately regretted his choice of
wayward
. He considered for a fleeting
moment apologizing, but never got as far as deciding before she
spoke.

“I am not sure how
wayward
these men and
women might be, but we have spoken directly to over two thousand
Muslims who up until the last couple of months were regular
worshippers at their mosques and today no longer visit.”

“Two thousand?”

“Statistically relevant,” Amiri
clarified.

“Statistically relevant,”
confirmed Jones. “And what did this statistically relevant portion
of your worshippers (he almost said
flock
and was very glad he didn’t hit
that pot hole) give as the reason for no longer
attending?”

“Ruth Marten,” said Amiri.

“The defendant?”

“Of course.”

“Why?” asked Jones.

“The most common reason given was that they
had tried meditation and found it to work.”

“Found it to work?”

“That is what I said, and that is what they
said.”

“What percentage of the two thousand gave
that answer?” asked Jones before Judge Moore did—which he assumed
that she was about to.

“Forty-one percent.”

“So, of the two thousand people you
interviewed, over eight hundred told you that they had found
meditation to work?” By the time the last word had crossed his lips
Jones was berating himself for asking the question. He was not in
the business of validating Ruth Marten’s promises. But the number
had taken him by surprise.

“That is correct.”

“What does the Koran say about meditation?
Is it permissible?”

“It is permissible.”

“So those who meditate are not in
trouble?”

“What do you mean?”

“They are not breaking any Islam precepts
that would get them in hot water with their Imams?”

Miss Amiri looked at Jones and then up at
the Judge, not sure what Jones was getting at.

Judge Moore sympathized and said, “Where are
you going with this, Mister Jones? Is it relevant?”

“I was under the impression, your honor,
that Islam frowned upon Muslims engaging in practices other than
Islam.”

“Well,” said Amiri, “It does.”

“But you just said that Islam did not frown
upon meditation.”

“Meditation has its place in Islam.”

“Buddhist meditation?”

“I never said that,” said Amiri.

“Ah,” said Jones.

“Get to the point,” said Judge Moore.

“Will these eight hundred
confessed
Buddhist
meditators now be in trouble with their Imams?”

“How do you define
in trouble
?” said
Amiri.

“Well, how would you define it?” said
Jones.

“Mister
Jones,” said Judge Moore. “Don’t badger the
witness.”

“Their Imams,” said Amiri,
“will not be happy with the meditators, that’s is true. But they
are not
in trouble
as you seem to like saying. It’s not as if we are going to
stone them or anything.”

Both Judge Moore and Otto Jones flinched at
this biting remark. Jones took a moment or two to regain composure.
Then said, “I’m sorry, Miss Amiri, I didn’t mean to imply (imply
what?). I just wanted to establish that these Muslims knowingly
went against the wishes of their religious leaders, something you
rarely do, in order to take Ruth Marten up on her offer.”

“I guess you could put it that way,” agreed
Amiri.

“Let’s return to the cause, the
statistically relevant cause of the thirty percent drop, give or
take, in attendance at your American mosques. You have established
this to be Ruth Marten’s Internet lectures?”

“Yes, we have.”

“Have you seen similar drops in other, more
traditionally Muslim countries?”

“We have seen drops,” said Amiri.

“As large?” asked Jones.

“I don’t know. They have not shared their
numbers with us.”

“But they have experienced a drop in
attendance, in countries like Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Iran?”

“That is my understanding,” said Amiri.

Jones considered asking for more detail, but
decided not to. He had made his point: even Islam was being
devastated by Ruth Marten’s promises.

“No further questions,” said Jones.

Judge Moore looked over at Ruth Marten,
expecting her to decline again. To her surprise, Ruth Marten said,
“One question, your honor.”

“Please approach,” said Moore.

Ruth rose and walked over to Amiri. For a
long, silent moment Ruth took her in, and not without interest.

“Miss Amiri,” she said. “Have you listened
to any of my lectures?”

“Yes, I have,” said Amiri.

“And what did
you
think?” asked Ruth.
She stressed
you
to make very sure that what she was asking was Amiri’s
personal opinion, not the opinion of her federation or
religion.

“I found them to be quite interesting,” said
Amiri. Truthfully.

“Thank you,” said Ruth and returned to her
seat.

“The witness may step down,” said Judge
Moore.

:

John Keeler, the Boston Archbishop speaking
for the American Catholic Church and its attendance problem, and
the Reverend John Fielding, head of the American United Methodist
Church, were Jones’ final two witnesses for the day, both
testifying to similar devastations of congregation attendance due
to Ruth Marten’s pernicious (Keeler’s word) and venomous
(Fielding’s word) influence on their respective flocks (neither
objected to the term).

After Fielding’s testimony, Judge Moore
called it a day.

:

That evening, the Los Angeles Times ran this
banner on its Web site: “Marten Disrupts World Religions.”

The article, reporting on the trial, then
went on to detail how through her now ubiquitous (a word often used
these days) lectures seemed to reach and speak to all ages of all
denominations, whether Christian, Muslim, Hindu, or Jew.

According to quoted statistics, testified to
at trial, the falling off of devoted flock was as drastic among the
Muslim and Hindu as amongst the Christians and Jews.

The question though, and one which Otto
Jones seems to have skirted altogether, is whether this is a good
or a bad thing. He has, in the writer’s opinion, successfully
establish that Ruth Marten’s teachings have reached, touched, and
wrested from the clutches of established religion a large
percentage of their congregations, but he has not established
whether this is for the good or for the bad.

Perhaps, the article concludes, this will
soon be addressed.

Other media, whether online or television,
filed similar reports, most highlighting (and verifying by their
own research) the tremendous impact Marten is having on traditional
and organized religion. Most also end by asking the Los Angeles
Times question: Good or bad?

::
130 :: (Los Angeles Federal Court)

Otto Jones’ next witness was nothing short of
a coup.

Nora Fielding’s daily
television show,
Of Sound
Mind
, enjoyed some of the best viewer
ratings in the country, and was also syndicated to a healthy part
of Europe and Asia. And it was the number one show in Australia. In
fact, one of the tabloids had not long ago broadly wondered whether
there was a person alive on Earth who did not know who Nora
Fielding was.

Psychiatrist by training and
educator/entertainer by current trade, by appearance Nora Fielding
could also have been Judge Moore’s sister. The same startlingly
gray hair adorned both women, and for the occasion it seemed that
Fielding, for some hard-to-fathom reason, had arranged her hair to
mirror that of the judge’s. Standing up, hand on the Bible, taking
the witness-oath, the resemblance was close to uncanny, and the
hushed wave that seemed to break upon the shore of the court room
confirmed this.

Judge Moore was not a little uncomfortable
about this what she deemed a bit of a spectacle, but concealed it
well, wrapped in a well-worn and fitting let’s-get-on-with-it and
unsmiling air.

“Miss Fielding,” began Jones. “I would like
to get right to the point. In your opinion, is Ruth Marten a danger
to society?”

“Yes,” she answered.

“Why is that?”

Before she answered, Nora Fielding seemed to
have discovered some minor wrinkle in her skirt, which she took a
moment to even out. This, one would assume, for effect, to deepen
silence and heighten attention. She was a pro at this and she was
succeeding. Apparently satisfied that the wrinkle was taken care
of, she looked up at Jones, and then over at the jury and said,
“There is nothing in this world quite as alluring, nor quite as
impossible to reach, as the promised bliss of enlightenment.

“Many, throughout history, have promised
this holy grail, and purportedly shown the way, but no one has
ever, can ever, or will ever, deliver on this promise.

“Still, as the lost individuals we all are,
we still fall for this promise, we still hope to find it, and don’t
forget that hope is the one human emotion stronger even than
fear.”

She briefly looked down at her lap, as if to
verify that the skirt-wrinkle remained taken care of. Then she
looked up again:

“We will never cease to thirst for the
impossible, and not for a long time, if ever, has this promise of
the impossible been presented so enticingly, nor as beautifully, as
by Miss Marten.”

“Are you then saying—for you are certainly
implying—that Miss Marten lies in her account of the way to
enlightenment?”

“Lying is a strong word, Mister Jones. Lying
does assume intent to deceive. I do not know for certain whether
Miss Marten intends to deceive, she may believe what she’s
saying.”

“But what she does say, what she is telling
her audience, in your expert opinion, is not true?”

“Her
message
is definitely not
true.”

“And you say this based on what?”

“A thorough and well-grounded education
followed by two decades’ worth of professional experience with the
human race.”

“Why, though, does this present a danger to
society?”