Vertical vs Horizontal Transcendence
person
Don't believe everything you thinkThe liminal space Veteran
Listening to a podcast between Scott Barry Kaufman and Ken Wilbur, Scott raised an interesting concept I hadn't heard of before, vertical vs horizontal transcendence. It opened up a lot of thoughts and feelings around my spirituality at present. These are pretty much just my thoughts and are pretty much completely ignorant of existing thinking on the matter.
I'm relating horizontal transcendence to the bodhisattva path and its feeling to me as life affirming. In my practice I've long started with the prayer "Until enlightenment I go for refuge to the Buddha, Dharma, and Sangha. Through the merits of this practice may I free my mind from craving, hatred and delusion so I may be of benefit to others". I think years of having done this practice has created in my mind the notion that even though my practice benefits me, ultimately it is also for others, in experience and intent it isn't a purely selfish pursuit. Scott mentioned that in the idea of horizontal transcendence there isn't such a strict delineation between what is good for oneself and what is good for others. In terms of the interview it felt a lot of the time like Scott was pushing back against Ken's more vertical notion of transcendence.
The way it has me thinking at the moment is in terms of the notion that the path of the Arhat is relatively quick and the path of the Bodhisattva is eons long. The enlightenment of an Arhat is that vertical transcendence that escapes the world, the enlightenment of a Buddha embraces the world. But because it embraces the world it has to psychologically bring the rest of existence along with it.
I'm just making stuff up, but it feels opening and empowering for me. Probably in part because I don't really feel able to escape life right now, and in my experience my practice does have a positive impact on those I interact with. Or maybe it fits with the type of bodhisattva I've always resonated with, that of the ferry man vs king like (Amitaba) or shepherd like(Avalokiteshvara).
Comments
Interesting!
When I read the topic name I thought of the Pure Land practice (Easy Path - vertical) vs all other practices (Difficult Path - horizontal)
Definitely interesting.
In terms of my Buddhist studies I’ve always avoided getting too invested in the Bodhisattva ideal because it is a commitment that you do not know if you’ll be able to keep. I was always more comfortable with the paramita’s as an aspirational quality, and doing in this life what you can.
The goals that Buddhism places in front of you — enlightenment, a good rebirth, the Pure Land — I have recently realised are not my goals. My goals have to do with the path right now, being where I am and gradually unfolding as my awareness shows me more of who I am.
Ramana Maharshi (whose book Be As You Are I am currently reading) once said “the greatest gift you can give the world is your own realisation.”
I think what I wanted to say was that by placing a strong aspirational ideal of service like the Bodhisattva in your practice, you shift the focus away from working on yourself to working in the world.
Vertical vs Horizontal Transcendence
These are only guard rails to keep pilgrims returning to the center of a winding spiritual road towards suffering's cessation.
It appears that staying somewhere between those two guard rails actually offers more of a direct route towards suffering's cessation than results through mere clinging to one or other of those rails.
Do not put yourself too close or far away from either.
It doesn't have to be so separated, your practice can be motivated by wanting to be of greater benefit. Like learning to be a doctor or something, to be of spiritual service its important to be coming from a place of peace, love and wisdom.
Yes, that is possible. To be motivated to pass on one’s peace, love and wisdom, which were developed through spiritual practice. But that still requires picking up skills like oratory.
Here in the Netherlands there is a University course for being a spiritual counsellor, which you can take in a variety of flavours, including Buddhist. I have wondered about how useful it is. Of course Christians have had theological colleges for a very long time.
I'm actually referring to something more basic. The sort of example and presence you offer in life. When you're a generous, composed person people take some level of note and it tends to rub off. When your words and actions are driven by wisdom and compassion they tend to spontaneously offer healing to the world.
The Buddha was about to go vertical until legend has it that Brahma Sahampati implored him to teach the masses that there are those who have 'little dust in their eyes' who could benefit too - in other words go horizontal as well.
The Buddha's teachings are still around and there is no need for Bodhisattvas at the present time.
In other words, get yourself on dry land first and if you can help others along the way, all the better but if not that's fine too.