Welcome home! Please contact lincoln@icrontic.com if you have any difficulty logging in or using the site. New registrations must be manually approved which may take several days. Can't log in? Try clearing your browser's cookies.
Sunday thoughts on the Mystery
Simonthepilgrim
Veteran
I was asked to say something about what I mean by the Mystery. Because I use so much Christian imagery, I thought this might be a place to share a few thoughts:
What do I mean by the Mystery?
I suppose that I would have to address it sometime. Or, perhaps, all I have been doing, for years and years, is ask myself the same thing.
I had the good fortune, whilst at Oxford, to become friendly with Professor Robin Zaehner (we both shared a taste for Armagnac). At dinner, one night, in All Souls', I was sitting next to Leslie (A.L.) Rowse, the Shakespearean scholar. Robin and I were rambling on about a vague project that we had to write a book together on Bernanos and the theme of childhood. Rowse, who was one of the rudest men I have ever met, suddenly interrupted by asking me, at the top of his voice, "Tell me, what do you mean by those three letters G, O, D? What do you mean by God?" and proceeded to bulldoze and rubbish every argument I had. I was rescued from total destruction by John Sparrow deciding that it was time for desert and we adjourned elsewhere. As I recall the humiliation, I am wondering whether I am still trying to answer that monstrous old Cornishman.
In Mallory's Morte d'Arthur, and T. H. White's Once and Future King more humourously, King Pellinore is doomed to hunt a mythical beast. In Mallory, we never meet the beast, I seem to remember, although we may think we sight it. It is the same thing in the Ten Ox-Herding Pictures, which are a constant source of reference for me.
** One answer that I can give to the question is that the Mystery is something whose very existence can be doubted and which, at the same time, is referred to and adumbrated across human history.
All three authors that I have mentioned allude to or attempt to describe this same Mystery. My fondness for such authors may be a major contributor to the scope of my studies. Perhaps, had I only read scientific texts or more analytical works, instead of devouring stories and essays and pictures and music, my mindset might have been different. That opens a quite different, if connected, set of questions about 'soul', 'personality'. 'ego' and so on.
Because the Mystery may or may not exist or have existed or be going to exist, it is approached through stories and symbols, parables. It is precisely because there are such stories and symbols everywhere and everywhen that they fascinate me. There have been many times when I have asked (aloud, to annoy the preacher, or to myself to examine honestly) "if X is true, how come it took human beings y thousand years to discover it?" For example, the Christian church had to invent the "harrowing of Hell" to explain that 'salvation' came even to those who had already died when Jesus did his bit. But, long before Jesus, in all parts of the inhabited world, people were spinning their own stories about the Mystery, some of which held sway for much longer and some still do. What proves that this particular one is the right story, the territory and not just another map?
Dante speaks about the love that moves the sun and stars. We 'know' that it is the play of electro-magnetic forces which moves them. Neither explanation satisfies me. So, I can give a second answer to the question:
** The Mystery is indicated by my sense of dissatisfaction, of being unconvinced by the completeness of any cosmogony or theology.
Time and again, I have come across what I must now consider to be a generalised phenomenon, experienced to some degree by all human beings. It is a sense of 'awe'. It is the "wow!" moment. And that is my third answer:
** The Mystery is that which triggers the human sense of awe.
Of course, 'awe', like any other emotion, has depths and dimensions. It also responds to different stimuli. Each individual appears to have a unique, if recognisable, arousal pattern for awe, just as with all emotions. The state of the awe experience, whilst described in different terms by different people, may have objectively describable general characteristics. I would love some academic psychologist to design experiments which would give us solid information, including the physiology and body-chemistry of awe.
Accepting that I am biased, the next question must be, "why do I think it important?" Up to here, you may or may not agree but the subject is trivial when there is the lunch to put on or cat sick to clear up (on my desk! Thank you, Sunya). Why do I spend so much energy on practice and study and correspondence about the Mystery, when I can't even define what it is?
Of course, the reason is that I think it might be of vital importance. Over and again, the Wise have agreed on that point: 'it' is vitally important. Understanding or knowing 'it' is crucial to happiness and well-being, to longer life, to greater happiness and so on.
Just as our sense of smell leads us towards fresh bread baking and we can feed our hunger, so our sense of 'awe', what some have called a sense of the 'numinous' (take your choice among spellings) may point us towards some vital 'food'. The problem is that there are so many cooks!
When in practice as a counsellor, I noticed that an awakening sense of awe often preceded significant changes in the clients' lives. In addition, my own experience of living with depression suggests that depression and awe are incompatible, the one effectively eclipsing the other.
Both of the last two 'answers' above refer to the effects of the Mystery, in much the same way as we describe electricity by its effects without, necessarily, understanding its nature or processes.
So, in the end, because it's a Mystery, there can't be a complete answer to the question. It is the sudden movement you think you saw, out of the corner of your eye, when there is nothing there. The more you stare at it, the less you see. The harder you grasp, the less you feel.
All my study and the exercise of judgment and imagination is aimed at this one, underlying, riddle: by my sense of awe, I become aware of a Mystery, in art, in litersture, in music, in wonderment before nature. Pascal is said to have called this a "god-shaped hole" (although I have yet to find an exact quote!) and Saint Augustine wrote that
What do I mean by the Mystery?
I suppose that I would have to address it sometime. Or, perhaps, all I have been doing, for years and years, is ask myself the same thing.
I had the good fortune, whilst at Oxford, to become friendly with Professor Robin Zaehner (we both shared a taste for Armagnac). At dinner, one night, in All Souls', I was sitting next to Leslie (A.L.) Rowse, the Shakespearean scholar. Robin and I were rambling on about a vague project that we had to write a book together on Bernanos and the theme of childhood. Rowse, who was one of the rudest men I have ever met, suddenly interrupted by asking me, at the top of his voice, "Tell me, what do you mean by those three letters G, O, D? What do you mean by God?" and proceeded to bulldoze and rubbish every argument I had. I was rescued from total destruction by John Sparrow deciding that it was time for desert and we adjourned elsewhere. As I recall the humiliation, I am wondering whether I am still trying to answer that monstrous old Cornishman.
In Mallory's Morte d'Arthur, and T. H. White's Once and Future King more humourously, King Pellinore is doomed to hunt a mythical beast. In Mallory, we never meet the beast, I seem to remember, although we may think we sight it. It is the same thing in the Ten Ox-Herding Pictures, which are a constant source of reference for me.
** One answer that I can give to the question is that the Mystery is something whose very existence can be doubted and which, at the same time, is referred to and adumbrated across human history.
All three authors that I have mentioned allude to or attempt to describe this same Mystery. My fondness for such authors may be a major contributor to the scope of my studies. Perhaps, had I only read scientific texts or more analytical works, instead of devouring stories and essays and pictures and music, my mindset might have been different. That opens a quite different, if connected, set of questions about 'soul', 'personality'. 'ego' and so on.
Because the Mystery may or may not exist or have existed or be going to exist, it is approached through stories and symbols, parables. It is precisely because there are such stories and symbols everywhere and everywhen that they fascinate me. There have been many times when I have asked (aloud, to annoy the preacher, or to myself to examine honestly) "if X is true, how come it took human beings y thousand years to discover it?" For example, the Christian church had to invent the "harrowing of Hell" to explain that 'salvation' came even to those who had already died when Jesus did his bit. But, long before Jesus, in all parts of the inhabited world, people were spinning their own stories about the Mystery, some of which held sway for much longer and some still do. What proves that this particular one is the right story, the territory and not just another map?
Dante speaks about the love that moves the sun and stars. We 'know' that it is the play of electro-magnetic forces which moves them. Neither explanation satisfies me. So, I can give a second answer to the question:
** The Mystery is indicated by my sense of dissatisfaction, of being unconvinced by the completeness of any cosmogony or theology.
Time and again, I have come across what I must now consider to be a generalised phenomenon, experienced to some degree by all human beings. It is a sense of 'awe'. It is the "wow!" moment. And that is my third answer:
** The Mystery is that which triggers the human sense of awe.
Of course, 'awe', like any other emotion, has depths and dimensions. It also responds to different stimuli. Each individual appears to have a unique, if recognisable, arousal pattern for awe, just as with all emotions. The state of the awe experience, whilst described in different terms by different people, may have objectively describable general characteristics. I would love some academic psychologist to design experiments which would give us solid information, including the physiology and body-chemistry of awe.
Accepting that I am biased, the next question must be, "why do I think it important?" Up to here, you may or may not agree but the subject is trivial when there is the lunch to put on or cat sick to clear up (on my desk! Thank you, Sunya). Why do I spend so much energy on practice and study and correspondence about the Mystery, when I can't even define what it is?
Of course, the reason is that I think it might be of vital importance. Over and again, the Wise have agreed on that point: 'it' is vitally important. Understanding or knowing 'it' is crucial to happiness and well-being, to longer life, to greater happiness and so on.
Just as our sense of smell leads us towards fresh bread baking and we can feed our hunger, so our sense of 'awe', what some have called a sense of the 'numinous' (take your choice among spellings) may point us towards some vital 'food'. The problem is that there are so many cooks!
When in practice as a counsellor, I noticed that an awakening sense of awe often preceded significant changes in the clients' lives. In addition, my own experience of living with depression suggests that depression and awe are incompatible, the one effectively eclipsing the other.
Both of the last two 'answers' above refer to the effects of the Mystery, in much the same way as we describe electricity by its effects without, necessarily, understanding its nature or processes.
So, in the end, because it's a Mystery, there can't be a complete answer to the question. It is the sudden movement you think you saw, out of the corner of your eye, when there is nothing there. The more you stare at it, the less you see. The harder you grasp, the less you feel.
All my study and the exercise of judgment and imagination is aimed at this one, underlying, riddle: by my sense of awe, I become aware of a Mystery, in art, in litersture, in music, in wonderment before nature. Pascal is said to have called this a "god-shaped hole" (although I have yet to find an exact quote!) and Saint Augustine wrote that
Neither defines their terms in such a way as to satisfy me for more than a moment or two. Like Zadig, in chapter XVII of Voltaire's novel, I may have to prostrate myself before the angelic and the last word on my lips will still be "But....."our hearts find no peace until they rest in you.
Confessions I, i
0
Comments
What an interesting post! Thanks for sharing it. I enjoyed it.
Adiana :thumbsup:
So is the "mystery" just that hole in your life of the unknown?
-bf
My thought on mystery is -- must we know everything? (Not that you said we had to - just thinking)
I am finding it interesting to think about the unknown and mystery. What is unknown is sometimes a mystery - but not always.
I guess mystery has a component of our not being able to grasp it with intellect. (And so it is a delight.)
Random thoughts. I like your drift -
Thanks!
ECM
*Thinking*
-bf
-bf
Perhaps the hole is created in the "thinking" there is a God.
I haven't felt that so called empty feeling or "hole in the soul" since I let go of my previous theist structure. Perhaps, the answer may lie in the assertion that the created are some how seperate from the creator, an in Paul's commentary that, we ( believers) are adopted children of God and the direct relationship with that creative energy is forever unattainable. Another exclusionary tact is conditioning to believe that the part of " G-d " that is with you the "Holy Spirit" is a "gift" from somewhere other than where you are and not part of your true nature.
I know run-on sentence
Perhaps the subconcious? Gets pretty dark in there at the back.
-bf
I really enjoyed that. It made me wonder why humans are driven to art, music, interaction, dance (yes, Morris dancing too), rituals, traditions, etc. Do we do these things to fill that hole? People like Joseph Campbell have been discussing the ideas and processes of myth/tradition/ritual that humans have evolved for thousands of years.
Do we really come up with these notions to fill some sort of gap? Did the Buddha come to this "mode of thought" simply to fill a gap? Was he delusional? Was Jesus delusional? Are people that come up with these beliefs just so driven to come up with something... anything to fill this gap - that something finally "cracks" in them?
I know there are many things that I do in my life to fill holes - and I still think I've got some left!
-bf
It's a mystery all right.
Palzang
I feel Palzang (and this is not meant in any way to imply criticism, merely an indication of my own possible confusion) is referring more to the "itch that cannot be scratched"....
....Or am I talking fooh-bah? :crazy:
I would agree he might be inclined to conclude it's just another mental formation.
Also,
Are we " driven "? Where's the driver? What is moving?
Do I do just because I like to move/dance energy, because I can?
And what's this I thing anyway? LOL
Why do you think they're two different things?
Palzang
In answer to Iawa, e pur se muove. "The ascetic Gotama" made enormous effort but, as a mystic, I suppose would you want to say that he made none?
'There must be something more. There must be.' - My mothers argument for the existence of god.
Is ths what we are talking about?
I can't help but feel the way i felt reading the tao of Pooh when reading this thread: like i'm trying to grasp the wind in my fingers.
That's a good point, and one that occurred to me once I had posted.....:rockon:
Palzang
I think the answer is perhaps in the question, that being - there is no specific answer. If there were only "one" way to live then we would all be drones and have no individuality. I believe that we are finite physical/spiritual beings in an imperfect world. Thusly, I think that we cannot ever truly conceive of any one path (or religion) that solves everyone's problems and is the answer to everything. Because I have grown up in "Christian" America I will state my belief as follows: Regardless of what anyone believes 'heaven' and 'hell' either exist in some form or another or they don't. Also 'God' (or perhaps the 'Mystery') either exists in some way or does not. What I mean to say is that things are as they are no matter what one believes. That being said, I certainly do NOT know anything more than the next person, per se. So, those are some of my thoughts and me thinking them does not make them so. Does this idea make sense and seem to hold any relevance to anyone?
I don't believe there is one 'right' religion or way of life for everyone (but that doesn't mean that there isn't, I just strongly don't believe that there is). My only partial conlcusion is to live one's life as best as possible with respect for others and for the 'unknown' or Mystery or God. Or, perhaps it's better to say that if one lives one's life to the best of their ability then no one and nothing can ask more of that individual.
Regarding the 'hole' that most of us feel. I attribute this feeling as mostly a spiritual one; a feeling that is bred into us or just naturally appears in us as we grow; a desire for 'something more'. I, also, think that because we are finite and imperfect we can't ever truly 'fill the void' in ourselves, though perhaps we can? Sometimes a void that one feels is just a desire for more human contact or deeper relationships with friends or family or possibly a desire for a deep romantic relationship. Well, I'm sure my post isn't entirely coherent but I tried. And hopefully I didn't offend anyone. Truly this is something that I would not intend.
I think that is a vital point and is part of the 'hidden' message of the Gan Eden (Garden of Eden) story. Before eating the fruit, human beings were simple drudges, doing what Yhwh tells them to do. They eat the fruit and know good and evil, but not, I notice, where these notions come from. The rest of the book seems to be about trying to understand these strange ideas.
O felix culpa!
Everyone, everywhere, is doing the best they can at any given moment. Always.
Of course, that's not to say their best can't get better.
_/\_
metta
P.S.- I am offended at how utterly non-offensive your post was.
To suppose is to assume, of which I do my best not to.
Who was the Buddha's teacher? I don't know and don't care.
Effort, merit are inconcievable to measure form one person to another. Therefore, discussion is futile at best. I don't think that Goatma blew his own horn about what efforts he made to come to enlightenment. Like other's he said, " Come let me share with you what I've discovered." The beginning of the dialogue was the first spinning of the wheel of Dharmma, and the open dialogue continues to this moment. I'm curious who you're referring to as a mystic?
Apple eating is not a sin! :rockon:
The Mystery to me seems pretty much like some form of ordered fate, although I still insist that they are only probabilities out of random chaos in the atomic level... It might be a hole, a desire, or an attempt to make meaning out of something.
I have heard somewhere that Man is able to take the worst forms of pain and suffering, only if he sees a meaning in it.
Perhaps this desire seems justified, considering how it has brought us from forest ape to sophisticated heads. It seems almost like an universal law for all life to advance and progress, etched deeply in our senses. This as I know, is considered by true Christians to be our "spiritual side", a "God-shaped hole", where to me, God seems to be the representation of the Perfect, an Omega Point, where all theistic religions start to stem from backwards.
I don't know if I entirely agree with that statement... I see a lot of people, though they need not live up to my standards, who just don't care. I know people who don't care enough to change their eating habits, so they could do better. I know people, like myself, who don't give a damn about politics and so they/I don't even try to make any difference. Also, what about people who commit cold-blooded murder or people who rape others? They certainly don't need to do those things and yet they do anyways. Does this make sense?
sure it makes sense, but I don't think it conflicts with my statement when you take into account my saying "of course, that's not to say their best can't get better."
Basically, my point is that everyone is acting at the highest level of truth that they are capable of at any given moment. The key here is the "at any given moment". That means that at the moment, there are things which are preventing them from operating at a higher level of truth. Delusion, depression, anger, you name it. Only when they become aware of these influences & see their shortcomings are they able to work past them & raise their capacity. I know my original statement may have seemed like a pointless point to make, but it has actually had some very positive affects on my thinking in regards to others. People are where they are in life. They can only do what they can do. This realization really helps to undercut my tendency to judge harshly.
Can you see what I'm saying?
_/\_
metta
I'd have to agree. I think a lot of people don't do the best they can or even try. They've gotten too afraid, too worn out, too bored, or too whatever, so they just shut down. They just slide through life on their worn grooves and never take notice of anything really. I've known lots of people like that. What they're doing is creating animal realm karma.
Palzang
That's the thing. At their level of consciousness, they can't actually do any better than they are doing. In order for their awareness to expand/deepen, there must be something which fundamentally motivates them to expand/deepen it. Now, of course, people could make different decisions which are much more skillful. But certain conditions must be present for that to happen. If those conditions are not met, then those decisions are not going to be made. Yes, we all have the same innate potential for buddhahood, but it takes karma eons to play out to the point where one even considers the 4 Noble truths. If we are going to take the truth of anatta to heart, then we must recognize that 'they' are a conventional designation for a given set of khandhas working together. Volition is a huge factor here, and there are karmic states where 'beings' cannot take in the Dharma in a manner which would create a change in their volition. As unfortunate as it may be, sometimes their karma just has to play itself out.
I think this is where the bodhisattva vow sets in. We must see the inability of sentient beings to recognize the fruit of their actions & whether they're on the road to hell, heaven, or liberation. We are all samsara addicts after all. This arouses compassion which motivates us to practice the 6 perfections & improve ourselves to the point of full buddhahood. So, instead of a heinous action causing an inner response of judgement & condemnation, it causes an inner response of proper discrimination & a furthering of our earnestness in practice.
Now, I'm not saying that the 'best' that people are doing couldn't be better. What I am saying is that under the conditions of the present moment, it is not possible. It is up to karma & those of us with the discrimination to change those limiting conditions.
Anyway, I hope this has clarified my meaning a bit.
_/\_
metta
I love that quote.
I just wondered; to what extent are people conditioned to be too afraid, too worn out, too bored, or too whatever?
I appreciate what you are saying about not wanting to be condemning or judgemental and I agree. However, I don't believe that certain conditions determine the outcome of one's actions. Each person is responsible for themself regardless of what is happening to them or around them. Not to say that what is going on around us doesn't affect us, but it does not control us. Therefore, each person chooses their own path or lifestyle and all the choices it encompasses. I'm not the most knowledgeable person when it comes to Karma, but I can say that waiting for something to changes one's environment in order to live a better life is just an excuse to do what one is doing presently. That's how I see it anyways. Truly every person has control over their actions. Furthermore, I believe that unless one is truly incapable of rational thought or is declared 'legally insane' then one is at all times aware of what they are doing and also of the effects of their choices.
To say one's actions don't depend upon conditions seems strange to me. There is not a thing which does not depend upon conditions. Now, there is the unconditioned, which Buddhists aim to realize, but one's motivations, past experience, mental capacity, emotionality, and so on all affect one's actions.
Also, I certainly never meant to imply that we are not responsible for our actions. So I apologize for my poor communications on this point. My point is not to give anyone a total reprieve for their actions, either. It is simply to be aware of how each person is acting at their highest capacity, based on varying degrees of ignorance, craving & hatred. And of course, those limitations can & should be removed.
_/\_
metta
Palzang
I really don't think this actually contradicts what I'm trying to say at all. In fact, I would say it is very much in agreement with it. I guess I'm just really sucking at communicating this right now.
_/\_
metta
Palzang
_/\_
metta
I'm sure you know Dame Julian of Norwich, Brigid. She, too, saw the same scope.
Palzang
Well, I said "Each person is responsible for themself regardless of what is happening to them or around them. Not to say that what is going on around us doesn't affect us, but it does not control us." So, yes all of these things affect one's actions but the issues in life do not control us. That is my only point. I just don't like it when people say they aren't in control of their own actions... I find that hard to believe. I could be wrong but I feel like it's an excuse to do whatever they want.
They are in control of their actions to the extent that they are conscious of where the decisions lie. In other words, some people are making unconscious, habitual choices which prevent them from being able to control the outward behaviors. So, in a very real way, until an addict makes some very difficult choices on a subtle level, they will not be able to control their addiction. And I would like to clarify that I never said people were not responsible for their actions. I was also not trying to assert that individuals did not have any level control over their actions. However, I would say that until we reach a certain level of awakening, that the best we can do is manage our actions.
_/\_
metta
In challenging these thoughts, I realise what I am trying to do. From all my studies, all my experience, I have acquired a view that all is not well with our lives. People are unhappy and badly treated by each other. I do notfind this either congenial or necessary - alhough social 'darwinists' suggest that it is. I also notice that, from time to time and in place after place, people arise who offer ways of dealing with the basic unsatisfactoriness. At the same time, they include reference to an underlying unity or principle.
This underlying or overarching principle is, also, generally expressed in terms of wisdom, compassion and justice, and is deemed to be the source of human goodness which, when developed, leads to the happiness and equity that I crave for all beings.
If we exclude the notion of the underlying wisdom-love-justice, we are still left with the questions of how to be in the world but, to those, are added the other question of "why?"
It is to address these questions that I started my decades long investigation. At first, and still when appropriate, I used words like god ot tao or sunyata or abzu to denote the principle. At the same time, I recognise that each of these terms come with accumulated and differing meanings. Some even reference some sort of personal relationship with humanity, others assume an impersonality.
There is much more that I could say about the Mystery and, no doubt, I shall go on doing so. There is even more for me to understand.
If I include my preconcieved notions into the present I choose to live reactively based on the the ramblings of the conditioned mind, rather than looking deeply at the moment for it's ultimate reality.
I either live my life looking to solidify my notions, or I open myself to realize through the act of meditation that when such questions come to mind that this again is yet one more secretion of the brain. With such trianing, I am possed to see and act within the truth of the moment, rather then behaving reactively based on re-sentiment.
Could it be that you are physically feeling the stressors that are all around us?
We do live in very stress filled times, and I believe the vibrations of the Earth resonate as if uner attack.
Then again, life has always been on the tipping point.
I remember some Catholic Using the example of the book " Sin and Punishment " to explain the Tsunami's awhile back. I went and told my RE class when I was asked, " If God's so great where was he when the Tsunami's hit?"" Why didn't he stop it."
We all looked at Genesis and cncluded that God was the creative force that put the world into motion, and having a living creative nature it changes. When the world violently changed people happened to be in the way of that change, and and being a part of creation God is in our response to those people affected by that change.
A sponsor told me sometime back in my twelve step days-
"The answer to why is because, anything beyond that is rationalization and justification."
So Because...........