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.
Spiritual Bypass
Though I bit hard for me to pin down as a term, "spiritual bypass" is mentioned in circles I frequent and there are books that discuss it too. I guess it has to do with jumping ahead with too much "light" and ignoring the "shadow," to put it in Jungian psychological lingo. Jung said something like, "The greater the light, the deeper the shadow."
It is a sorta psychologically oriented thing. That is, there are sorta "left-over" bits of stuff that we carry around that we may not acknowledge and then we "bypass" when going into more spiritual things, if that divide is possible, and it is arguable that it is not, I realize.
Still it seems to me that "spiritual bypass" might be a "danger" for those of us seeking a path, any path. So I wondered what people might have to say about it.
It is a sorta psychologically oriented thing. That is, there are sorta "left-over" bits of stuff that we carry around that we may not acknowledge and then we "bypass" when going into more spiritual things, if that divide is possible, and it is arguable that it is not, I realize.
Still it seems to me that "spiritual bypass" might be a "danger" for those of us seeking a path, any path. So I wondered what people might have to say about it.
0
Comments
1. It is an essentially Western phenomenon. linked to prosperity and surplus income.
2. It has been described long ago and many times. Freud called it the "flight into health". One can also find descriptions of it in many religious traditions.
3. "Bypass" is an unfortunate term: I am only alive today because of my cardiac bypasses, and many a small town has been saved by road bypasses. What is being described is avoidance.
I will give one example of how it is coming up. I wish I could give examples that spring to mind but that would be undecorous since it involves an online site. Instead I will use school. And a particular experiential class we are required to take.
It is a Group Dynamics course. It focuses on "truth in the context of compassion" as the skill to be practiced and learned. (We are in a T-Group, which is a specific kind of group where there is no direction from the leader and where comments are all in the here and now of emotional responses.) The truth part, they say, came easily to people in the 60s who experimented with these sorts of groups. But the compassion part is what as therapists we need to learn, according to the premises of the course. (I myself am having trouble with some of the premises of the course, such as only emotions, so I am not saying that this is all a good thing.)
"Truth in the context of compassion" to them means that one learn to be honest and genuine, not hold back, but do so in a compassionate manner, that is, with unconditional positive regard. Some especially at the beginning of such a training exercise will want to be "polite" and not risk anything. But there are some who will hold religious or spiritual values above their supposedly "lower" responses and not be forthcoming about what is called the "truth" here for the sake of training.
That one is in truth angered, or bitter, or resentful, to stay with one feeling tone may be difficult to work with and it may be easier to "bypass" it, sorry Simon. Rather should I say squelch the honest to goodness real experience and cover it over with sweetness and light, meanwhile there is a smoldering fire below.
Perhaps it is a Western thing, though it seems that it would be a human thing for anyone on a path that has lots of "light" in it about good conduct and so on. Facing the shadowy material may just be frowned upon in the view of some who aspire to be so "good" that they forget their humanness. The intention is not a harmful on purpose, but my sense of it from what I have seen is that it can produce harm in many ways, to self and to others, because all that material unprocessed and stuffed becomes toxic so to speak and spews out all over the place anyway. The harm to oneself might be the most insidious since it is a form of self-deception and repression or suppression that will lead to unbalance eventually and paradoxically lead one off the very path one is trying maybe too hard to maintain, if I may put it that way.
Palzang
Have you not encountered those who can quote the teachings (till their blue in the face) and not have an ounce of compassion? or admit they are ever wrong? or confront hostilities they may have bubbling just below the surface?
This type of thing is what is called "spiritual bypass." When there is a sort of blockage, sometimes put in the framework of psychological blockage, and the person skips that over to jump into the "goodness" that the path seems to provide.
I was just reading the Lotus Sutra where right off the Buddha says that a moment of clear understanding can happen without getting caught up in the dharma (and/or not dharma). This is where he gives instructions about leaving behind the raft. It is sage advice. And might be eye-opening to some who are too much involved in the concept of the dharma rather than actually having moments of clear understanding.
Palzang
Interesting thinking. I do hope, dear Island, that you will forgive me for truncating your post and for highlighting parts of it for my present purposes.
I think Palzang makes an excellent point in saying that the Noble Eightfold Path is designed to be a no-nonsense approach to the spiritual life, and is not as susceptible to this "spiritual bypass" as are other religions.
Dogmatic religions such as Christianity and Islam do have their "vicarious living" attributes, in which the religious practice of the follower may well become "just another part of ones ego-territory," using Palzang's words almost verbatim.
So many Christian people simply cannot see a lot of the rudeness with which they treat others or some other harms they do to others since, after all, they are "nice Christian folk" who follow Jesus. I've seen a lot of this even in my former life as a devout Churchman. And, believe me, so many church people are just mean to one another and to their clergy. Compassion for one's fellow human beings is not at all a universal ideal in the Church.
Above I alluded to this "spiritual bypass" as a "vicarious living." I've long thought about this. In people's religious beliefs they often superimpose the myths of their religions onto their own experiences and judge harsh judgments on others who, out of their failure to fit to one's liking into this nice mythological world, are fit only to be punished or even suffer eternal hellfire.
Island, I really have enjoyed pursuing this line of thought, and am sorry for my meager abilities to expound more understandably and to flesh out more fully what I am trying to say. I hope we can continue this conversation, as it interests me greatly.
Palzang, this "spiritual materialism" idea of Trungpa's is interesting. I recall that the late, great Swami Ranganathananda used the words. "A piety-fringed wordliness" in describing the mindset that this subject might touch upon in part.
Above, by "myth," I do not mean anything dismissive or anything along those lines. I CERTAINLY do NOT mean the second dictionary definition, namely, a widely held but false belief or idea. No, by myth I mean a traditional story concerning the history or purpose of a people through which their lives take on heightened meaning or significance.
Now, what I am trying to say is that with many, if not most, of the people in a modern society that pay some kind of credence to these myths, there is perhaps a tendency for them to remove themselves from the "real world" and, as a consequence of being so removed, they become less able to respond compassionately to their neighbours. In other words, this living-in-the-myth is vicarious living IF one is not deeply attuned to the well-being and feelings of others.
But you all said it better than I. I'm just finding a few more words, as sketchy as they are.
Welwood, J. (2000). Realisation and embodiment: Psychological work in the service of spiritual development. In G. Watson, S. Batchelor, & G. Claxon (Eds.), The psychology of awakening (pp. 137-166). York Beach, ME: Weiser.
That one is in truth angered, or bitter, or resentful, to stay with one feeling tone may be difficult to work with and it may be easier to "bypass" it, sorry Simon. Rather should I say squelch the honest to goodness real experience and cover it over with sweetness and light, meanwhile there is a smoldering fire below.