Posts Tagged ‘Jesus’

The Three Views of Existence Part 3

December 22, 2011

Our present-day understanding of religion is poor. When people discuss religion they are usually arguing about some doctrine they read in a book somewhere. Most of today’s religious institutions and organizations are led by people who have had no direct experience  of the spiritual, but who have ideas about what  it is. But you can’t get religion from a book or from speculative thought.

Here’s what real religion is: A person sets out on a path that takes him, or her, to the very edge of what can be understood with the thinking mind. At the point he can go no farther, he drops his ego and takes a leap into the unknown where he has a vision of the oneness of existence. To most people this sounds like some kind of Eastern religious trip. But I contend that Jesus took the same journey. If you read the Gospel of Thomas, one of the so-called Gnostic Gospels, it’s easy to recognize. One of the good things about the Gospel of Thomas is that it’s all sayings and aphorisms. There isn’t any mythology attached. It’s simply religious instruction. And religious instruction is mostly about how to manage safely the spiritual journey, which is incredibly dangerous.

Maybe it’s pointless to try to talk about this. To most ears, the journey I’m referring to sounds mythical rather than real. But that’s because of the time we live in, which is mundane and materialistic. In any case, for the moment, the door to the journey is closed. But it wasn’t so long ago that the door was open, and thousands, if not millions, were in pursuit. Even then, it was difficult to get people to understand. For many years, I was one of those who refused to hear of it. Futile or not, I want to try and make the point that in my mind I’ve been wanting to make for several months.

My contention is that real religion is simply the search for the truth about existence, about reality. There is one true religion, and it doesn’t have a name. It is simply the laws of existence—an existence that goes beyond physical reality. Jesus, Buddha, Lao Tse, and others are all examples of individuals who  made that journey, and then came back to tell the rest of us how to go there. In each case, only a handful of the original hearers had any real idea of what Buddha, Jesus, and Lao Tse were talking about. But they were impressed by the power of the speakers, who had been completely changed by their experiences. That’s where the big churches came from—from the mass of people who didn’t really understand what they were hearing, as well as from those who heard it second and third hand. In the first group I would include most of Jesus’ disciples; in the second, people like Paul, Augustine, Martin Luther, and so on. (I’m being critical of Christianity here, but I see Buddhism as having identical problems. One of the problems is to think that there is a “Buddhism” or a “Christianity.”)

It’s not easy to get people to understand what’s true. It’s easier to give them a jealous god who sits on his throne, sees all, and crushes his enemies. They can understand that much more easily than the idea that everything is god, that everything is mind. We all have, at the very least, an unconscious awareness of the spiritual roots of existence. That’s why the churches became so powerful. But as the churches have grown ever distant from the source, their doctrines have become more at odds with observable reality. A few centuries ago it got to be too much for the well-educated, and they began to question what they knew as religion, which was the creator god religion they’d inherited from Paul, Augustine, Martin Luther et al. Eventually they created science and philosophical materialism as a replacement. Today those two sides are duking it out, making headlines, trying to win converts. I can’t take either one of them seriously. There is that third way, which is quieter and more intelligent than either the creator god or philosophical materialism. It has the added advantage of being true. But, as I say, the door to understanding it directly is not open right now. That will change, however. Sometimes I feel that that’s all I live for—for that door to open again. When it does open, everything changes for everybody everywhere.

The Three Views of Existence (Part 1)

November 20, 2011

During my recent bout with the flu, I spent a good deal of time lying in bed, thinking. At one point, my thoughts landed on the subject of the three fundamental views of existence, which are 1) the creator god view, 2) the scientific/materialist view, and 3) the pantheistic, or everything-is-god, view.

To elaborate a little, the creator god, or monotheistic, view is what most people in this culture think of when they hear the word “religion.” It’s the idea that there is a god who exists apart from his creation. There are many different schools of thought within the fundamental view, ranging from followers of intellectuals like Augustine to populist evangelicals. The scientific/materialist view maintains that there is no spiritual realm whatsoever. There is only the material plane, and consciousness arises out of the workings of chemistry and physics. These first two views are currently duking it out. They barely recognize the existence of the third view, the pantheistic view, which says that the entire universe is god. (I used to assume pantheism meant “nature religion,” that the “pan” referred to the Greek god Pan—or something. But “pan” means “all,” as in “Pan American.” So Pan-theism is “everything is god.”) We are god. The rocks are god. The trees are god. It says that the material realm arises from the spiritual, that everything is mind. It includes schools of thought and tribes that range from serious, committed Buddhists to frivolous New Agers. (While Jesus is seen as representing the creator god view, I believe he was actually teaching the pantheist view. But more on that later.)

Each of these views affect how we live and respond to events—even if we’re not very serious in them. For example, if you believe in the scientific/materialist view, which I think is currently the most popular and widespread view, then there is no such thing as “wisdom.” There is only knowledge. A people that sees knowledge as the be-all and end-all of life also sees material and scientific progress as essential to our growth as a species. We are currently entering an era where we are hitting the limits to material progress—the end of growth. I’m seeing constantly that whenever this idea is brought up in public, the materialists become angry or despairing. There will be no reason to live! But it’s not like that—not at all. We will never truly start living until we get past our present-day obsession with money, possessions, and scientific progress. We’ve committed ourselves to an enormous misunderstanding of what the material plane is. And I’ll get into that in part 2.

Protest Sign

October 3, 2011
Protest Sign

Sign at an anti Tea Party March

If Jesus Were Alive Today

August 1, 2011

If Jesus were alive today, saying what he said before, and if he had a following, the Republicans would be furiously agitating against him, raising violent passions against him, vilifying his “anti-American” philosophy, and seeing that he was placed in the same kind of danger that Martin Luther King found himself in. If he had no following, they would merely smirk and mock him.

More on Politics and Religion

November 7, 2009

Jesus said you cannot love both God and mammon, for you will inevitably hate one and love the other. “God” does not mean some white-bearded dude up in the sky. “God” means truth, integrity, justice, and compassion. Mammon means money and fame. The trouble with the Democrats is that they attempt to love both, so they’re always in turmoil and confusion. The Republicans confine their love to mammon—to mammon alone. That’s why they’re able to be so disciplined. But it’s the path to ruin.

Jesus was a Socialist

November 5, 2009

Today on the front page of the New York Times web site was a photograph of a crowd of angry right-wingers who had flown to D. C. to protest the health care bills currently before congress. One man was carrying a sign that said “No Socialized Health Care.” Well, I, for one, want socialized medicine, and something considerably more “socialized” than what is currently being proposed. But looking at that photograph, my strongest feeling was that the ideology of the men and women in that photograph needs to be thoroughly discredited. They call themselves religious, but they oppose real religious ideals whenever they encounter them. If he were one of their contemporaries, they would be calling their beloved Jesus a “socialist.” Jesus told the rich man to sell everything he owned and give it to the poor. If that’s not advocating redistribution of the wealth, what is?

Reading Rexroth

March 19, 2009

I’ve been reading Kenneth Rexroth lately and enjoying him a great deal. In his long poem (200 pages!) The Dragon and the Unicorn I found in one small section two statements of belief that I’ve held myself for quite some time. They’re related. The first one is this:

A real religion is not
Believed in, it is practiced.

I think that’s an important idea. A lot of Christians think that all you have to do is believe in Jesus, and you’re covered—which isn’t true. You have to put the principles he taught into practice—and they’re tough ones. You can’t understand religious ideas any other way. You can’t take your understanding from a book. Books get messed with. More importantly, religion—real religion—is ineffable, and no book can contain the ineffable. It’s only there to get you started.

The second statement is:

Neither Augustine nor Karl Barth
Are religious men. They are
Emotionally unstable

I don’t know anything about Karl Barth, but I’ve had a gripe with Augustine for a long time. He wasn’t a saint; he was an intellectual. And while not the first, he was one of the biggest distorters of the teachings of Christ. He was, in part, trying to make the new religion palatable to the Empire, which has nothing at all to do with spirituality. It’s a perversion of it.

Buddha is Waiting

December 1, 2008

Most people assume that if you quote Jesus, you must be a Christian. Or if you quote Buddha, you must be a Buddhist. Others insist that if you don’t call yourself a Christian, you have no right to quote Jesus, which is nonsense. Christ and Buddha are the same. They are different bodies living in different times, but they have the same mind. Strictly speaking, there is no Buddhism and no Christianity. The true religion has no name. It’s universal law, the way things actually happen. The Japanese Zen Master Suzuki Roshi said the same thing on several occasions. I won’t go any farther into my own thoughts on the subject right now. This is merely a preface for a Suzuki Roshi quote that I like very much. I find it humorous. From Branching Streams Flow in the Darkness:

Even to create one page of new dharma is very difficult. Even though you feel that you have invented something new, the Buddha is always waiting there for you. Buddha will say, “Oh, come here. Good for you! Come nearer to me. I have some more things for you.” It is very hard to surpass his teaching.