What follows is a discussion of some material found in A Short History of Philosophy by Robert C. Solomon and Kathleen M. Higgins (Oxford 1996).
Though their book is somewhat uneven, the interludes of analytical brilliance make a read-through worthwhile. I was intrigued by what seems to be a succinct summary of the essence of much of Indian philosophy, which prompted some thought.
This chapter also appears in another of Conant's e-books, Dharma Crumbs.
As paralleled in Heraclitus and some of the other pre-Socratic philosophers, in Vedanta, Brahman is the ground, the value, and the essence of everything. This ultimate unity is therefore a coincidence of opposites – hot and cold, dry and wet, consciousness and world – which is incomprehensible to us. Brahman is "beyond all names and forms," and, like Yahweh, Brahman is a name for the unnameable, a reference to what cannot be understood or analyzed. Brahman is always "not this, not that."
But, we are assured Brahman, can be experienced, in meditation and mysticism, with Brahman being ultimately identical to one's true self or atman. It is thus the awareness of Brahman, most importantly, that is every person's supreme personal good. One of the obstacles to this good, especially among the learned, is the illusion of understanding.
The apostle Paul would very likely have identified Brahman as the "unknown God" – the utterly mysterious mind behind and within all existence.
Yet, he would say, we cannot connect to this mind without the intermediary Jesus, the Savior. The Unknown God decided to reveal his great love of humanity by this means. That mind is far beyond our rational capacities, whether the mind is called Brahman or Yahweh.
Yahweh (=Jehovah),
which means,
He is,
hence suggesting,
I am.
Thence
Jesus (=Joshua=Yeshua),
which means,
I am salvation
or
I save.
Jesus is the human face of the Unknown God, or Brahman. As the Son, Jesus is the projection of God into the world of humans.
Ultimately, Brahman is in fact one's true self, we are told. This idea runs parallel to Jesus, quoting scripture, saying "you are gods" (hence strongly implying "you are God") and to saying that he would bring to his right mind, or wake up, the person who turns to him. Those who turn to him are, says Paul, junior partners in Christ, welded into a spiritual oneness. All share the Holy Spirit, an inexhaustible fount of wisdom and cheer. In other words, they share in God's mind. So if believers have God's Spirit, they begin to awaken – sometimes very slowly – to their true, higher selves. They are returning to the state of perfect oneness from which their angels – atmans – have fallen.
Also, we are told, that in Vedanta recognizing oneself as atman is at the same time recognizing one's true self as Brahman. "An individual person is really just one aspect, one of infinitely many transient manifestations, of the One." Even so, there is plenty of room for interpretation as to whether Brahman is to be considered as the One who created those manifestations, or is identical to them, or is incomprehensibly different from them.
So, I suppose many Buddhists and some Vedantists turn away from the concept of vast, unfathomable mind. Yet are they not reaching toward superior mind or consciousness for their destinies? Why should such greatly enlightened minds be the pinnacle of the cosmos? It seems to me that that would mean that something that is less than the cosmos would still be superior to it, even if, perhaps, only temporarily. (Do you hear an echo of the ontological proof of God's existence in that argument?)
Yet, we must be careful here because of the apparent difference, for Buddhists, between mind and consciousness. In Buddhist parlance, the idea is to empty one's mind or self, obtaining the state of the anatman, which essentially means no-mind. That is to say, the Buddhists equate the human mind with the self, which needs to go away in order for the person to reach a state of bliss. From my perspective, both the Vedantist and Buddhist ideas are summed up by the New Testament injunction that one must die to self, to lose one's carnal mind (stop being a meat-head).
It should be noted that the authors say that Buddhists, in general, view Brahman and atman as illusions. Yet, if there is no ground of being, what is it that Buddhists are attempting to reach? How can any kind of eventuality exist without a ground of being?
Now, the Buddhist aim of enlightenment, either in this life and this body, or in a future life and body, yields this puzzle:
What is it that will suffer or experience bliss in the future? If the basic Buddhist theory holds that the objects of all desires are transitory, that the mind and soul are both temporarily existent illusions, that nothing lasts forever, then why desire a state of non-mind bliss, that supposedly implies an end to suffering? "You" won't be "there" to enjoy nothing anyway. Similarly, why worry about karma (you reap what you sow) in a subsequent life if it isn't really you proceeding to that next life?
So then, a Buddhist would desire to share in the bliss of Nirvana. He or she does yearn for some continuity of existence between his or her present state and the future. Of course, Buddhists will attribute such a contradiction to the inadequacy, when it comes to sublime mysteries, of human logic and language.
(We acknowledge that the Northern – Mahayana – school favors that devotees strive to become boddhisatvas, or enlightened beings, who delay attainment of Nirvana in order to help others become free of the bondage of suffering, whereas the Southern – Theravada – school favors Nirvana first followed by the helping of others. In either case, our puzzle remains.)
In response James Conant, a Buddhist, quotes Chögyam Trungpa:
The bad news is you’re falling through the air, nothing to hang on to, no parachute. The good news is, there’s no ground.†
We can draw a parallel here based on these scriptures:
Psalm 46:10
Be still, and know that I am God: I will be exalted among the heathen, I will be exalted in the earth.Being still here, I suggest, implies a deep, meditative awareness, letting our transitory thoughts and desires subside so as to permit the "ground of being" to be heard.
1 Kings 19:9-12
9 And [Elijah] came thither unto a cave, and lodged there; and, behold, the word of the Lord came to him, and he said unto him, What doest thou here, Elijah?At the core of existence is God. He is not "in" the phenomena, even though he causes them. (I note that there is a distinction between the "word of the Lord" that asked Elijah why he was hiding in a cave and the "still small voice." I suggest that Elijah was led to commune with God at a deeper level, at the "ground of being" if you like.
10 And he said, I have been very jealous for the Lord God of hosts: for the children of Israel have forsaken thy covenant, thrown down thine altars, and slain thy prophets with the sword; and I, even I only, am left; and they seek my life, to take it away.
11 And he said, Go forth, and stand upon the mount before the Lord. And, behold, the Lord passed by, and a great and strong wind rent the mountains, and brake in pieces the rocks before the Lord; but the Lord was not in the wind: and after the wind an earthquake; but the Lord was not in the earthquake:
12 And after the earthquake a fire; but the Lord was not in the fire: and after the fire a still small voice.
Mark 4:37-40
37 And there arose a great storm of wind, and the waves beat into the ship, so that it was now full.The world's phenomena, that we take to be so real, are subject to the human mind when it is in accord with God's mind.
38 And he was in the hinder part of the ship, asleep on a pillow: and they awake him, and say to him, Master, care you not that we perish?
39 And he arose, and rebuked the wind, and said to the sea, Peace, be still. And the wind ceased, and there was a great calm.
40 And he said to them, Why are you so fearful? how is it that you have no faith?
41 And they feared exceedingly, and said one to another, What manner of man is this, that even the wind and the sea obey him?
A key difference between the Christian and Eastern outlooks is the assurance that Jesus will assist the believer to die to self (granting the fact that it doesn't always appear that very many believers actually do so).
Matthew 16:25
For whosoever will save his life shall lose it: and whosoever will lose his life for my sake shall find it.For a list of other supporting scriptures, please see:
https://zion78.blogspot.com/2018/02/we-must-die-to-self.html
The spiritual seekers of ancient India had had some important revelations. Yet, in Christian eyes, they were yearning for the big revelation that did not occur until the resurrection of Jesus.
We observe that Jesus himself pulled in those of low estate, who were acutely conscious of their need and not so inclined to intellectualize themselves out of drinking in the water of life. The "poor in spirit" (meek) are the ones positioned to break through the barrier of self-justifying delusion. Even today, as through the centuries, very strong belief flourishes best among the poor and lowly.
Matthew 11:28-29
28 Come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest.
29 Take my yoke upon you, and learn of me; for I am meek and lowly in heart: and ye shall find rest unto your souls.
†. Brings to mind
- Free fall in orbit or outer space
- Life in the amniotic sack
- The "unbearable lightness of being."
No comments:
Post a Comment