posted April 09, 2013 12:40 PM            

The best part of man is indistinguishable from the least part of God.

Most atheists and agnostics, when they seek to dismiss religion, make assumptions based on popular notions of who or what "God" is. They satisfy themselves as to the foolishness of a particular sect, or perhaps only the foolishness of the most exoteric, often unintended, interpretation of that sect's beliefs, and proceed to imagine that they have effectively proven the foolishness of all religion.

They do not understand:
If we wish to know what religion is,
we will have to study the mystics, not the masses.

Science is not debunked simply because the average man on the street, who believes in it, cannot demonstrate the scientific method. Nor do we conclude that his inept demonstration is an actual demonstration of that method. It is simply one man's foolishness. If he is a common man, then it is a common foolishness, but however prevalent wrong views may be, they do not suffice to blacken the things they distort. Truth remains what it is, and if we wish to know it, we must go to those who have made the sincerest and most expert efforts at realization; more precisely, we must go the way they went.

Now, the true mystics have always asserted that "God" is simply a word, a name, for something which defies description, and which may only be hinted at through actions, images, and ideas.

The greatest mystics have found, through the experience and practice of deep meditation, a level of consciousness so secure, so peaceful, and so profound, that they were able to experience a complete transcendence of the personality, the body, and all sense of separateness; with the input of the mind and senses hushed, they were able to sink, and to settle, into the very seat of their being; to actually experience their connectedness with everyone and everything. The love and fearlessness this inspires has made these individuals beacons of virtue. They have become symbols for something greater than themselves; historical guideposts, signifying the revelation of the purest truths and mysteries.

Not surprisingly, many of them have chosen to articulate their insights in poetic (i.e. symbolic (i.e. religious)) language, and to refer to this ultimate ground of being as "God", since it seemed worthy of the greatest name, and since there was apparently no greater name available than the name of "God". Likewise, many things in their experience are described as sacred, holy, or divine, because no lesser words seemed fitting. This is, of course, a value judgment, and not open to dispute.

"So, then, why all the chaos?" we ask.

The world is a great mystery because of God, and God is a great mystery because of the world. At the mystical level, where God is encountered, there is an experience of absolute order, yet chaos seems to reign in the "fallen" world. Many have come up with various explanations for this apparent discrepancy between the perfectly ordered core of being and the chaos of outward manifestations. Not all of them have called this world the creation of God, and most of them have seen man as somehow responsible for his fallen nature. But, then, this is not inconsistent, if we consider that man is also a part of God, with the peculiar freedom to dwell as an individual in a realm of chaos, or to choose a life of devotion to something infinitely greater than himself.

If you really want to know God, renounce your personal will. With absolute, unflinching faith, accept and approve all that happens to you in this present moment. Genuine faith depends on nothing. It is not "faith in something"; rather, it is an aspect of God; a face of God; in the sense that it stands alone, as love does. Love of God is only Love alone -- Love of Love; pure Love. Likewise, true faith exhibits a sovereignty; the flame of faith is King; He requires nothing, answers to no one, and does not condescend to explain himself. "...he who seems most kingly is king." (~Thomas Hardy) It is the responsibility of subjects, if they are loyal, to bring themselves into accordance with this unflinching fire; reason, experience, action, imagination, passion, personality, -- all these do not justify faith, but may be utilized in the service of faith. We are talking about the will to push forward, to aspire, to ascend, and to receive with dignified acceptance everything this present moment has to offer; seeing that what is happening in this moment is the best possible thing -- because it is the only possible thing -- and affirming the hell out of it; pun intended.

Faith stands naked, as it were, in a wilderness of silence, and discovers something here which may be fittingly called "the presence of God". If you do not wish to make this sacrifice, please, do not blame God, or the vacuum of space, or any other thing. You choose to live at this level, and you agree (consciously or not) to endure all that comes with this decision, -- including experiences which may be called hellish; where all hope is lost and, therefore, one experiences a kind of anguish which seems as if it would go on for all eternity (though it only lasts a moment or two). On some level, you accept all of this as a natural consequence, and the just price for being an individual apart from God. On some level, you apprehend an order in this chaos, and a chaos in this order.

The other option, we know, is to seek order in order itself; to seek that Truth, Love, Faith, and Higher Sense which may only be found in the most silent places of the heart; knowing that, in order to make this journey, we will have to leave behind our cherished sense of separateness, along with all our thoughts, emotions, desires -- in short, everything we are, or believe we are. No matter, we will receive them all again, ten-fold, transformed, once "the first thing" is accomplished. First, we must surrender. There is no room for pride. Narrow is the way. Few will find it. Fewer will follow it. And fewer still will remain faithful to it. This is a path of absolute commitment.

But, if we decide not to sit in meditation, to stand in prayer, to walk in contemplation, -- in short, not to look for God, -- then we must not be surprised when we neither see nor understand "Him"; when, instead, we see a universe devoid of God, and full of our own egoistic projections. Let us go ahead and enjoy the show, -- or else, get down to the real work. The choice is ours. There is no judgment. Love beyond our wildest dreams is offered and waits for us to accept the invitation. All we need is the faith to enter that stillness, to stay there, and to wait while the process of becoming merged with God deepens, and deepens, and deepens, ad infinitum.

To generate such faith, the study of saints and great mystics throughout history is recommended; those who have given abundant evidence of their love, including the willingness and ability to be martyred; to endure every imaginable suffering out of compassion for others. If any man would mock religion, let him begin by mocking these paragons of virtue -- but, if he would not mock virtue itself, then let him not mock religion, which alone has given rise to such heroes.

Again, the mystics are themselves religious symbols, and therefore portals into the contemplation of the most profound virtues, truths, mysteries, and paradoxes. Like all truly religious symbols, they are charged, through and through, with significance and wonder. They cannot help but communicate their gifts, at least in part, to anyone who applies his heart attentively to their words and lives.

Let us begin, if we will, by cultivating a love of virtue, endeavoring to see the rarest beauty exhibited in the form of virtue, and no beauty where virtue is not. Truly, substance is the height of style, and good form takes the form of the good. If we love virtue, and find her beautiful, then we cannot fail to keep company with saints; in our reflections; in our studies; in our most deeply cherished aspirations and dreams.

Build a fire! Devote your heart to God and you will find what you seek; your own heart will become the treasure.

Sooner or later, in this life or the next, love itself will seduce you. And you will want to know, "Who have been the true lovers, among men?" You will look for the ones who loved. And when you find the philosophers, you won't stop, but mount up to the saints, and look for just one who might become, for you, an unwavering example of love's highest wisdom. And maybe you will find Jesus, a man of the highest creative genius, whose words outstrip Shakespeare, yet, who made his life a work of love and, dying, forever became a perfect symbol of sacrificial love. A man who contradicts himself only in doing more than he promises, for he says, "There is no greater love than this: that a man gives his life for his friends," but then he gives it even for his enemies. The spectacle of such a love seduces all hearts, carries all of us together with it to heaven.

posted April 09, 2013 02:32 PM            

One of the eternal questions.

And how many unimagined assumptions underlie,
like a bedrock, all our formulated questions
(to say nothing of our ready answers)?

For instance:
Is God distinct from the soul,
that the impetus may be said to originate in one,
and not equally in the other?

Are there many souls, and many gods?
Or just one soul, to one God?

At our pleasure,
we may ruminate over it however we like,
answering it now one way, now another.

At last,
springing into the lightness of faith;
the transcendent confidence of flight.

posted April 09, 2013 06:36 PM            

but if someone needs to personalize god, to follow rules that lead to closer contact, i don't have much problem with that...because god - or what is called - is everything (and i mean everything) including each one of us in all our imperfections.

posted April 09, 2013 08:36 PM            

I like what you wrote. I don't know about "a superior being", but I think love requires something bigger than the personal self. For me, it does seem to help to have a spiritual ideal in the form of a human being who I can emulate; who can serve as a blueprint and remind me of the sort of man I try to be.

We all try to conceptualize God in a way that is appropriate for us at a given time. In the past, it has been appropriate for me to understand God as everything, including all of us and our imperfections. More recently, I incline towards a more Gnostic view; that God is the highest truth, or reality as perceived and understood in accordance with the highest truth. To me, God has less to do with what is (as we perceive it, in our "fallen" condition), and more to do with a certain kind of response to what is. In other words, I no longer see all things as "the will of God", in the strict sense in which I once understood this. Rather, as I understand it now, the will of God is for us to receive all things; to "abandon ourselves" in an attitude of humility, gratitude, compassion, and acceptance. We make good use of whatever is occurring in the present moment by submitting to it in the proper attitude. When we do this, we are "in the stream", as it were. Otherwise, we are in delusion. This seems to be working very well for me so far.

Padre,

In that case, I would really like to hear your own answer.

posted April 10, 2013 12:09 PM            

"Therefore if I know not the meaning of the voice, I shall be unto him that speaketh a barbarian, and he that speaketh shall be a barbarian unto me. Even so ye, forasmuch as ye are zealous of spiritual gifts, seek that ye may excel to the edifying of the church. Wherefore let him that speaketh in an unknown tongue pray that he may interpret."
~ 1 Corinthians, Chapter 14:11-13

The most obvious meaning, it seems,
would be that the will (or the intention)
has more authority with God than the works;
not what one does, but what one tries to do.

But I didn't grow up with anyone telling me how to read it,
so, I come to these things with a fresh perspective,
for better or for worse.

I have, however, read many works by saints and mystics,
and they tend to agree that, when we are in the spirit,
a single verse can sprout a variety of interpretations,
not all of them intended by the authors, but intended by God.

The various meanings may contradict one another,
but such contradictions can be used to prevent us
from fossilizing into any particular way of seeing.

Provided they lead us toward a more open and reflective state,
it would be difficult to conclude that they are wrong.

Of course, we know, it has also been said,
"the devil may quote scripture to his purpose".

I have seen the most deluded people conclude
that a verse was self-explanatory, when, in fact,
they were projecting their own dogmatic notions.
And I have seen masters of exegesis demonstrate
the subtlety of scripture; that the deepest meanings
do not always lie so close to the surface.

Indeed, one man's surface may be another man's depth,
and the "best" interpretation, for each, may not be the obvious one.

Which is why, I believe, it is important to share,
and, in a spirit of openness, to illuminate one another,
without taking the aloof stance that scripture is plain,
and the man who doesn't see it our way is obfuscating.
Such an attitude already places a barrier between us
and the one to whom we are bound to minister by God.

We need to have the patience and the will to interpret,
in order to explain what may be obscure to another,
as well as to hear explanations obscure to ourselves.

Unless we read scripture in the self-same spirit
with which it was composed, we are prone to error.
And, even when we do read in that self-same spirit,
it is likely that we will receive new dispensations
which were not readily apparent to the men of old.

In such instances, we are more likely to compose,
than to tarry much with what has been composed;
to put new wine into new wine skins, as it were.

posted April 11, 2013 11:13 AM            

"Do you choose God, or does God chose you?"

I can answer it on different levels.

Paul speaks on a certain level,
when he says, "I speak as a man,".

Speaking as a man,
I could say that God is the Creator,
and, therefor, the source of all that is willed.

Whoever is a creation cannot be,
according to this sense, one who wills.

But, then, neither can one receive;
in the strictest sense, to receive is also to will.

We may say that grace is given to all,
but, that it is given in a special way,
to the one who receives it.

The reception of grace is only a greater share of grace.

So, then, if we are consistent,
even at this level of speaking,
the distinction becomes irrelevant;
if God is the only Doer,
God is all that is done.

Now we begin to pass beyond the creation,
and the creaturely, into the domain of the Creator.

For, that which is created exists in time,
but the ultimate reality, which is God,
transcends our notions of time,
and of separateness.

Speaking now in a higher sense,
we should say that there is only the Creator,
and that, in Himself, He is also the act of creation;
for He lives, which is to say, He moves,
but not as we do, in time and space.

As our perspective shifts to take this in,
the creation is essentially done away with;
it is consumed in flames, as it were.

But this is difficult for us to see,
and we are prone to think that we see it,
when we say that "everything is God".

Yes, everything is God,
but, in the strictest sense,
everything, as we know it, does not exist.

There is only God.
This play which appears,
and which includes all of us,
is a projection of unreality.

Your question, then, becomes a trick question,
which is why I chose to answer it as I did.

The dichotomy of "God and man"
may be helpful to us, when we "speak as men",
but, at the highest level, there is no us.

This is why I attempted to indicate
the notion of faith, which is single-pointed,
and not double-pointed, as logic must be.

posted April 11, 2013 02:15 PM            

The Word has be compared to Water, some rocks simply don't absorb the water no matter how deeply they are in the stream.

Nolite judicare secundum faciem, sed justum judicum judicate

posted April 11, 2013 04:11 PM            

God loses faith in no man, -- nor do I.