“It is interesting to note that in almost every field or specialty, common sense tells us that we need guidance and such is sought from experts. But when it comes to spiritual matters the greater majority have no hesitation in choosing themselves as both expert and advisor. This despite the Muslim aphorism that he who uses himself as his own director has Satan for his guide.” – Rama Coomaraswamy
How many times have we heard “I believe in a supreme energy, something like God, but I’m against organized religion” or “I’m spiritual, but not religious”?
As we explained before, the socialization of spiritual experiences can give us a compared perspective, and a way to share values. Nonetheless, people opt for building their own spiritualities in a mix of concepts and spiritual-like media. People become lone wolves in their spiritual pursuit, but being realists, lone wolves aren’t precisely the most efficient members of the wolf pack.
The Jesuit priest James Martin says:
“Being spiritual but not religious can lead to complacency and self-centeredness,”…”Religion is hard,” he says. “Sometimes it’s just too much work. People don’t feel like it. I have better things to do with my time. It’s plain old laziness.”
The truth is that people choosing their own ways of spirituality, besides lacking compromise, misunderstand the basic tenets of religions they conveniently cherry pick from. Let’s remember: “For where two or three have gathered together in My name, I am there in their midst.” Matthew 18:20, or in the words of Buddha: “Well awakened, they’re awake, ever the Buddha’s pupils, who constantly by day, by night, are mindful of the Sangha. [community]” Dhammapada, 298.
Religions, despite the obvious human mistakes, have been protectors of sacred literature, that literature which holds the concepts “God”, “soul”, “spirit”. Nevertheless, people believe that these concepts are simply there, in the books, DVDs or websites they consume, thinking that they need no further discipline and organization to dwell deeper in the concepts that, in the best case, are just theoretically correct.
“In the ancient days, when the first quiver of speech came to my lips, I ascended the holy mountain and spoke unto God, saying, ‘Master, I am thy slave. Thy hidden will is my law and I shall obey thee for ever more.’But God made no answer, and like a mighty tempest passed away.And after a thousand years I ascended the holy mountain and again spoke unto God, saying, ‘Creator, I am thy creation. Out of clay hast thou fashioned me and to thee I owe mine all.’
And God made no answer, but like a thousand swift wings passed away.
And after a thousand years I climbed the holy mountain and spoke unto God again, saying, ‘Father, I am thy son. In pity and love thou hast given me birth, and through love and worship I shall inherit thy kingdom.’
And God made no answer, and like the mist that veils the distant hills he passed away.
And after a thousand years I climbed the sacred mountain and again spoke unto God, saying, ‘My God, my aim and my fulfillment; I am thy yesterday and thou art my tomorrow. I am thy root in the earth and thou art my flower in the sky, and together we grow before the face of the sun.’
Then God leaned over me, and in my ears whispered words of sweetness, and even as the sea that enfoldeth a brook that runneth down to her, he enfolded me.
And when I descended to the valleys and the plains God was there also.
-“God” by Khalil Gibran
Man, as a slave, is tied to his master and his laws. Man surrenders because he fears the punishment of his disobedience; because he has tasted solitude and error, and by following orders he will commit no mistake and he will not be alone. He lowers his head, and begs for a master to grant him no hell. This is called in Catholicism “Attrition” or “Imperfect Contrition” where the sinner repents for fear of the sanction, and not for love of God. The Trent Council in Canon v, Sess. XIV declares: “If any man assert that attrition . . . is not a true and a profitable sorrow; that it does not prepare the soul for grace, but that it makes a man a hypocrite, yea, even a greater sinner, let him be anathema”¹ In this state, life is an unavoidable burden which subjugates man and leaves no place for piety.
What follows is man as a creature, whose life is a gift, a grace, the divine breath infused in all living flesh. Yet man cannot recognize his own soul, confusing it with life, with some inkling of joy as a creature, as an animal, but not in the glory of his recognition as the imago dei, the image of God, and therefore grace is not fully received. In the Platonic school of thought, there is an idea called Scala Naturae, or “Great chain of being”, where man is imbued with the Logos. He’s beyond a creature, an animal, plant or stone. Although in this state, just as a creation, he can’t recognize this and so he understands himself only as his lower self allows him to.
And next man, as a son, sees himself as a lesser, mortal god, who deserves a place in Heaven through devotion and love. But the duality remains. The son knows about his Father, yet, he still is divided from Him, wrapped in the veil of maya, wailing in this valley of tears, expecting the kingdom of no suffering to come to the Earth. But, is He actually apart from man, waiting for an event to have an actual existence in the heart of His son? The sufi poet Ibn ‘Arabi said about this:
“You presume others to be other than Allah. There is nothing
other than He, but you do not know this. While you are
looking at Him you do not recognize Him. When the secret
opens to you, you will know that you are none other than He”
Man, as one with God, finally reaches Wahdat al-Wajud, or Unity of Being. Man becomes just a manifestation of God, not an entity that is separated by a intermediary reality. As was exposed by Meister Eckhart in his fourth sermon: “The eye with which I see God is the same with which God sees me. My eye and God’s eye is one eye, and one sight, and one knowledge, and one love.” This is the highest realization of man, and even when man goes through the world, the certainty of Oneness acompanies him wherever he goes.
Terra tremuit et quievit
dum resurgeret in judicio Deus, alleluia.
Notus in Judea Deus in Israel magnum nomen eius, alleluia,
dum resurgeret in iudicio Deus, alleluia.
Et factus est in pace locus eius et habitatio eius in Sion, alleluia,
dum resurgeret in iudicio Deus, alleluia.
Ibi confregit cornua arcum, scutum, gladium et bellum,
iluminans tu mirabiliter a montibus aeternis, alleluia.
Terra tremuit et quievit, dum resurgeret in iudicio Deus, alleluia.
Translation:
The earth trembled and was still,
when God arose in judgment, alleluia.
In Judah is God known: His name is great in Israel, alleluia,
when God arose in judgment, alleluia.
His dwelling is in peace and in repose, and in Sion is His habitation, alleluia,
when God arose in judgment, alleluia.
There He broke bow arrows, shield, sword, and war weapons,
you are glorious, more wonderful than eternal mountains, alleluia.
The earth trembled and was still,
when God arose in judgment, alleluia
God did Earth tremble and still… Brahma did Earth tremble and still… Tao did Earth tremble and still… alleluia.
Moderns excitedly point out that the holidays marking the birth and resurrection of Christ occur at times of the year that are of spiritual and ritual significance to many other traditions, particularly those that predate Christianity. Apparently it follows from this that if pre-Christian Europe held festivals during the winter solstice and the advent of spring, then Christian holidays are held at those times because of older traditions, not because they reflect the true timeline of the savior’s life.¹’² This in turn suggests that the origins of Christianity are mundane rather than divine.
But this is circular reasoning, because it makes a big assumption at the outset: that Christ is not the son of God. If Christ is the son of God, then it would make the most sense that his birth and resurrection did occur at spiritually and metaphysically significant times of the year. If anything, the fact that these times of the year are significant to other traditions is an argument in favor of the divine origin of Christianity. All truth is God’s truth, and all authentic traditions have their origins in Him. When a tradition has grown decadent and is replaced by a healthier tradition with stronger divine contact, syncretism occurs because there are symbols in both traditions that have the same metaphysical orientation. The incarnation and the winter solstice point to the same metaphysical truths, as do the resurrection and the advent of spring.
Also of importance is the consideration that Easter does not fall on the same date each year. This could imply that even if the resurrection did occur in the spring, by only celebrating it on a Sunday, Easter would likely not fall on exactly the same day as the event itself. This overlooks the fact that the date of the resurrection has double significance, in both the time of the year and the time of the week in which it took place. The divisions of both the year and the week have spiritual significance. The resurrection occurred during the spring, the time when the natural world enjoys new life, and also occurred on the sabbath, obviously the holiest day of the week for the Christian tradition. Celebrating it on a sunday at around the same time of year best captures and preserves this double significance.
The material world is one of time and change, change that often appears to us to be chaotic. But at a higher level, all material existence and change is bound by divinely ordained cycles. These cycles are many and are of varying degree, from a single day to the life of a man or the life of the cosmos. Within the cycles there are natural points of demarcation and division. That God’s manifestation on earth coincided with these points should not cause any difficulty.
———————————————————————————————————————
¹McDougall, Heather. “The Pagan Roots of Easter.” TheGuardian.uk. 3 Apr. 2010. Web. 04 Apr. 2010. <http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/belief/2010/apr/03/easter-pagan-symbolism>.
²Carlson, Royce. “The Pagan Origins of Easter.” Zenzibar.com. 1 Apr. 2001. Web. 4 Apr. 2010. <http://www.zenzibar.com/articles/easter.asp)>.
A miracle occurs when the supernatural order directly intervenes in the natural order. Through a modern abuse of language, the latter term has come to connote rationality, and the former irrationality. However, there is nothing irrational in the nature of a miracle. It is logical that the possibility of direct contact between the natural and supernatural orders must be realized, given that they are only separate in appearance. If the natural order was truly divorced from the supernatural, and therefore there was no possibility of a miracle, then it would have no existence whatsoever, because it would have no principle or root. If the inverse is true, then miracles are a necessity by the very fact that they are possible. The bolt of lightning, with its suddenness and blinding whiteness reflects the principle of the miracle in the natural order proper.
Some people reading traditionalist writers get finicky when they first see Truth with a capital T, because they doubt that any ultimate Truth can be attainable, or even worse, they fear a monopolization of opinion in the intention of establishing an “intolerant” version of Truth in society; both are typical misunderstandings of an individualistic modern era. We will explain what we refer to as Truth in Traditionalism.
From a metaphysical perspective, the whole of existence is present because of its participation in Reality, the Absolute. This is what Aristotle, Avicenna and St. Aquinas called in some way or other the First Cause, an uncaused cause, that which is by itself, but also causes the entire creation and its elements. Therefore, forms that emerge from that origin have specific characteristics that adjoin with the rest of the characteristics of other forms, under a series of natural laws. All forms partake of a single reality and irremediably act according to Nature.
The quest of natural sciences is to understand the physical laws that govern matter and to elaborate theories to explain their functioning. However, it is outside of its capacities to determine that what would be outside action and reaction , the Uncaused Cause, as well as a source of the laws of matter, even if laws themselves are made of matter. To understand Truth, it is essential to realize that “Truth” is not an empirical “truth” that may be contained within a scientifically experimental system.
Truth in the sense used by Traditionalists relates purely to the metaphysical nature of Reality, of God. The revelations which found religions are crystallisations of this Truth within the contingent sphere of forms. Once the metaphysical experience has occurred for the individual, to call it Truth is a logical consequence of a comprehension of a state preceding phenomena, from whence the multiplicity of forms is derived. “The Way produces one. One produces two. Two produces three. Three produces everything.” Tao Te Ching, 42.
In a strict sense, Truth is the saving manifestation of the Absolute, and according to Schuon, it differs from the concept of reality: “Truth and reality must not be confused: the latter relates to “being” and signifies the aseity of things, and the former relates to “knowing” – to the image of reality reflected in the mirror of the intellect “. Truth is the certainty of the Absolute. Also, as a term the word Truth provokes inquisitiveness, giving a variety of correlations in regards to specific aspects of spiritual pursuit.
An example is Truth serving as an opposition to what’s false or unreal in our perception: this is, in Sanskrit, maya. It is not that maya forms a reality apart from Truth, but only that it is an illusion that occurs within the Absolute, in which we see our ego and its material circumstances as the ultimate reality of consciousness. This ignorance of Truth, or avidya, makes us believe that the entire creation is separated and dispersed, through circumstantial dualities of attachment and aversion, and so the discovery of Truth requires man to pierce the veil of maya, surpassing ignorance. Again, this ignorance is not of an empirical nature, but it is a supposition that the thirst for our mundane ends (trsna) is the only possibility and therefore the highest motivation of man.
Truth has social implications as a social reality, even when both objects are different. Social reality is built around the pursuit of Truth, and finds its manifestation in the cultural sphere, bringing a mutually shared aim that pushes individuals towards a transcendent spirit. This, of course, does not escape from the organic life of societies. The rise of the greatest cultures in History has been conditioned by such sight, and their downfall has been marked by the pluralisation of smaller and individualistic convictions. The degeneration of civilizations shows a correspondent dysfunction in all strata of society, a neglect of Truth for the emergence of self-interests, causing class conflict. In this downfall, it is possible that an imposition of ideology may claim “Truth”, acting in an overly-coercive way foreign to aristocracy, and closer to tyranny. So, this “truth” is a social construction and an imposition very far from Truth.
Now, how can we know the constitution of this Truth, beyond its social functionality? Through Revelation.
We will cite Schuon again: “Revelation is none other than the objective and symbolic manifestation of the Light which man carries in himself, in the depths of his being”. Symbolic, Revelation carries a set of signs, and behaviour codes for the communities which essentially are connivance rules that even humanists can appreciate, and of which violation constitutes the disgrace of every culture. This aspect serves an exoteric purpose. The symbols are dependent on the history of cultures, but if they emerge from the Absolute, they have an objective end. Being Absolute and objective, God can’t be reduced as a social phenomena, even when there exists a social organization around the idea of a God. The key here is to understand the symbols in order to achieve the knowing of the Truth, attainable through the methods of prayer, which constitute a quest for the individual in his last stance.
Satya, a Sanskrit term for Truth, is understood in Hinduism as the everlasting reality independent to time and events. This means that Truth is immanent in the discoveries of a growing and positive science that occurs in human history, and also the rise and eventual death of human societies. Truth brings conditions for human reorganization across history, over a human and relative conception, and the man that ventures in the methods of Religion, not only through empirical science, finds himself in certainty of such Truth, transcending his human circumstances.
With the collapse of tradition, two different worldviews have taken its place: scientific materialism, and religious superstition. Both of these positions are equally modern, although it is the adherents of the former that explicitly claim to be so, while those of the latter claim to uphold traditional ideas, although their ideas lack proper metaphysical understanding.
A good example of these two worldviews can be found in the reaction to the earthquake in Haiti, particularly the controversy surrounding the claim made by some adherents of the superstitious worldview that the earthquake was divine retribution for sinful conduct (Pat Robertson has been the most prominent to make this claim). The adherents of scientific materialism naturally reject this idea, although their explanation of the phenomenon is also unsatisfactory.
The situation in Haiti is worth examining because throughout history natural disasters and other environmental factors have often played a significant role in human events. The materialists seize on this fact and claim that environmental determinism is the key factor in the rise and fall of civilizations (Jared Diamond is one of the more prominent proponents of this view). This is a standard anti-traditional approach, an approach that assumes that the greater comes from the lesser, in this case, that the material world is responsible for human civilization, rather than divine creation. Leaving aside the metaphysical difficulties of this materialist approach, we would like to offer a more sophisticated way of looking at natural disaster and its effect on civilizations.
The important point is that the result of a natural disaster is dependent on two things: the direct effects of the disaster (in the case of an earthquake, these would be the actual shaking of the earth and the following destruction of buildings, etc), and the level of the health of the individuals and civilization. In other words, disasters of the same magnitude will have different results for civilizations that are at different levels of internal health, depending on how well the individuals in those civilizations can deal with the difficulties. The earthquake in Haiti resulted in much more chaos than in would have in another country (for example, in western Europe), because the people in Haiti were already more chaotic in their psychic existence. The people who turned to savage violence following the disaster did so because they lack spiritual and mental order. The poor infrastructure of the country is also a result of a poor inner state. When the disaster struck, some of the external factors that held back this inner chaos were removed, and the latent chaos manifested itself. Everything in the material world has its source in the Divine, and earthquakes sometimes strike Haiti, and sometimes strike elsewhere. They can be a factor in the success or failure of a civilization, but not the only factor, barring a disaster of extreme proportions that physically destroys every member of a civilization.
Turning now to the problem with the superstitious account, while its proponents are correct to claim that this destructive phenomenon has a divine origin, they do not properly illustrate that punishment for wrongdoing begins long before external manifestations of retribution, and even seem to think that sinful acts are disadvantageous only after the punishment itself. If the Haitians were indeed turning away from the Divine, their punishment was found in the very act of turning away, just as order and wisdom are more fundamentally their own reward than any material benefit that might result from them. When turning away, one loses the ability to instill the world with order and becomes an inevitable vehicle for destruction. When natural disasters occur, the outer and inner destructiveness work as allies.
Up to this point we have looked at the situation from a very narrow perspective. In examining the question of how different societies react to natural disasters, we have judged the health or sickness of a society by the level of technical infrastructure and cooperation among the societies members. But we want to make it clear that in so doing we are not holding up modern, western societies as paragons, for these societies, while technically proficient, are equally lacking in spiritual values. In fact, it is no exaggeration to say that the spiritual life of western man is as destructive and chaotic as the current external situation in Haiti. Even if our technical infrastructure is perpetuated and perhaps improves, our inner life verges ever closer to annihilation, towards being enveloped in formlessness. Some westerners deride the Haitians for their inability to bring order to their external environment, but only because they see only outer appearances and are unaware of how they themselves have neglected the eternal part within us, the part that truly matters.
“This method of spiritual recognition has two inescapable and mutually inclusive sides: on one hand ethics as a guide for behavior for the external, material world, and on the other hand a contemplative exercise for inward, spiritual experience. In order to know the Divine, beyond all the acknowledged metaphysical theory, both these interdependent and indivisible aspects must be present within a given religion.¹
What exactly is this contemplative praxis? Very simple: Prayer.”
“A monotheistic religion is one which revolves around a single God. Usually monotheism refers specifically to religions of Semitic origin (Judaism, Christianity and Islam). The word itself, however, directly implies that which is essential to all religions and metaphysical doctrines, the Absolute
[...]
Monotheism makes two basic demands of all men, firstly faith in God, and secondly an actualization of this faith in every aspect of life. These two demands are outlined by Jesus Matthew 22:34-40, and form the fundamental principles of spiritual life within the sphere of all the major religions, monotheistic or not.”
Roughly three months ago, Jon Meacham published an article for NEWSWEEK titled The End of Christian America. In this article, the author mentions that “the rising numbers of religiously unaffiliated Americans are people more apt to call themselves ‘spiritual’ rather than ‘religious.’ (In the new NEWSWEEK Poll, 30 percent describe themselves this way, up from 24 percent in 2005.)” […]
To begin with, I think that society as a whole harbors incorrect presuppositions about religion. I won’t necessarily play the blame game, seeing as I feel that Christianity has often been misrepresented by its supposed adherents, but nonetheless, society now possesses numerous false ideas about what the movement is or what it should be. The truth of the matter is, Christianity becomes simply religion when relationship is replaced by routine.
This is the exact problem the apostle Paul dealt with in writing to the church at Philippi. In Philippians 3:1-16, Paul addresses the difficulty in dealing with the Judaizers in the church. This group set out to impose a sort of “Christian checklist” for all believers. The problem in this, of course, is that salvation is nothing that can be earned by human means. Upon successfully explaining this issue, Paul then proceeded in 3:17-4:1 to address antinomianism. This movement was essentially the opposite of the legalistic Judaizers, and these people felt that salvation could be obtained only by faith. Unfortunately, these people had actual standards for behavior.
What this means for Christians today is that we won’t be saved by simply fulfilling self-imposed obligations of praying, reading the Bible, etc. However, we do have to maintain behavioral standards for spiritual living, and these disciplines will involve structure and order to some extent.
The moment that a man communicates his spiritual emotions to another man, religion takes shape, because from this communication, a dialectic springs forth, and association occurs. Through the success of these ideas, or Revelations, Religion becomes the inescapable connection between the human group and the Divine.
Reading the article in this light, we notice the loss of contact from people towards this connection, to place themselves exclusively in the grounds of spiritual individuality. Why does this happen? A diversity of cultures living together and having a common territory produces a system which has to sustain them economically based on a democratic and secular ambience independent of their beliefs, creating space for an elective form of spirituality for the individual. However, this form of spirituality is often lacking.
We know that the mystic experience takes the form of the subjective , but its action framework doesn’t end there. It tends to be communicated, compared, and transmitted simply due to the love for Truth. Beyond seeing religious precepts as norms, religion brings behavioral standards to aid in a successful life in the community.
What does a man or woman gain by entering into traditional religion?
-Knowledge, peculiar to the communicative nature of religious association.
-An expert’s guidance in metaphysical and ethical issues.
-Identity.
-Social cohesion with like minded people, disposed to common objectives.
-Friendship and even romantic relationships with persons of similar values.
-Familiar integration in religious activities.
An individual of spiritual wealth can only benefit from traditional religion, acquiring associative capabilities and an opportunity to share knowledge.
occur at times of the year that are of spiritual and ritual significance to many other traditions, particularly those that predate Christianity. Apparently it follows from this that if pre-Christian Europe held festivals during the winter solstice and the advent of spring, then Christian holidays are held at those times because of older traditions, not because they reflect the true timeline of the savior’s life.¹’² This in turn suggests that the origins of Christianity are mundane rather than divine.
A miracle occurs when the supernatural order directly intervenes in the natural order. Through a modern abuse of language, the latter term has come to connote rationality, and the former irrationality. However, there is nothing irrational in the nature of a miracle. It is logical that the possibility of direct contact between the natural and supernatural orders must be realized, given that they are only separate in appearance. If the natural order was truly divorced from the supernatural, and therefore there was no possibility of a miracle, then it would have no existence whatsoever, because it would have no principle or root. If the inverse is true, then miracles are a necessity by the very fact that they are possible. The bolt of lightning, with its suddenness and blinding whiteness reflects the principle of the miracle in the natural order proper.
