Spiritual Materialism

T

Tariki

Well-Known Member
Messages
324
Reaction score
3
Points
0
Location
UK
Spiritual materialism..................I think we may have all heard the phrase. Replacing the pursuits, desires.....whatever......of our secular society, with "spiritual" ones.

Once again I am considering/reflecting upon this aspect ofany "path"........having read some words of Thomas Merton in his introduction to his little book of verses from Chuang Tzu........"(Chuang Tzu's "way")..........a refusal to take seriously the aggressivity, the ambition, the push, and the self-importance which one must display in order to get along in society. This other is a "way" that prefers not to get anywhere in the world, or even in the field of some supposedly spiritual attainment"

In Buddhism the "argument" revolves around the fact that "desire" is seen as the root of suffering........and questions are asked, does the "desire" for enlightenment involve a contradiction of some sort?

I think perhaps it does...............yet whatever talk there is of "we are already enlightened" (or variations on the same theme!)........we do not experience ourselves as enlightened.........there is ground to be covered, a path to be walked.............

Can "spiritual materialism" be avoided?

For me, this all involves "grace"............."other-power"................that, in a very real sense, all is finally "given"........not "attained" by whatever "technique" or "practice" we care to name.........

Yet, once again, there IS ground to be covered, a path to be walked.

I am encouraged by some of the other threads here to ask my questions.

Thanks for your time.
Derek
 
Tariki said:
Spiritual materialism..................I think we may have all heard the phrase. Replacing the pursuits, desires.....whatever......of our secular society, with "spiritual" ones.

Once again I am considering/reflecting upon this aspect ofany "path"........having read some words of Thomas Merton in his introduction to his little book of verses from Chuang Tzu........"(Chuang Tzu's "way")..........a refusal to take seriously the aggressivity, the ambition, the push, and the self-importance which one must display in order to get along in society. This other is a "way" that prefers not to get anywhere in the world, or even in the field of some supposedly spiritual attainment"

In Buddhism the "argument" revolves around the fact that "desire" is seen as the root of suffering........and questions are asked, does the "desire" for enlightenment involve a contradiction of some sort?

I think perhaps it does...............yet whatever talk there is of "we are already enlightened" (or variations on the same theme!)........we do not experience ourselves as enlightened.........there is ground to be covered, a path to be walked.............

Can "spiritual materialism" be avoided?

For me, this all involves "grace"............."other-power"................that, in a very real sense, all is finally "given"........not "attained" by whatever "technique" or "practice" we care to name.........

Yet, once again, there IS ground to be covered, a path to be walked.

I am encouraged by some of the other threads here to ask my questions.

Thanks for your time.
Derek
Click to expand...

Derek,

The mere fact that you can ask these questions speaks volumes about the inner work you have already accomplished.
I agree with Merton on the question of "Spiritual Materialism" but I think that it is merely another station on the path so to speak, one which if you are fortunate you pass up along the way, just as stages of moral development in the child are experienced and left behind in the process of growing up.

As far as the otherness you speak of, this too is a kind of truth. One may say that they have discovered that there is a power greater than they, and form this source and within this source have they their movement and being.
Absolutely! And once this realization takes place they just might begin to identify not just as their personality, but as an expression of the "Power that is not Power "so to speak, and begin to talk about their oneness with All-That-Is.

All of which are stages of growth, the religions, techniques, what have you are merely maps, some might be more helpful than others.

I am reminded of the Zen story about a man who was so holy the birds would come from the sky to sit upon his shoulders and feed from his hands. When he attained enlightenment, the birds no longer came.
( for those not aquainted with Zen, this speaks of the ordinariness of the individual and the enlightenment experience, in effect, the individual becomes "himself")

Peace,
Mark
 
Paladin,

Thanks for your response........Zen is not my "home ground" but I liked the Zen story you ended with. It bought to mind some of the words from one of my favorite sermons of Eckhart, a sermon on the words from the gospels.."Blessed are the poor in spirit,for theirs is the kingdomof heaven" where Eckhart speaks of the true poverty............"a poor person is someone who does not even will to perform God's will, but who lives in such a way that he or she is as free both of their own will and of God's will as they were before they were created".................."if God finds a place to act in them then we say........they have not reached the true poverty.............so we say that we should be so poor that we neither are nor possess a place in which God can act.......If we still have such a place within us, then we still have multiplicity."

I do think that to a certain extent we need to "lose control".............to lose trust in "technique" - even "practice" - and that this involves, almost paradoxically, a faith/trust in nothing - "no thing". I mentioned some where else the words of Thomas Merton, written to a young child who had drawn him a picture of a house.....at first with no road to it.......then a received a second picture showing a road...........Merton spoke of "the road to joy, which is sometimes mysteriously revealed to us without our exactly realising it". The Pure Land writer Unno has spoken of a "necessary stage of the path" being the moment when we realise, looking back, upon reflection, that self-power was in fact the working of other power." This can all become a confused jumble in the non-dual world of Buddhism...........perhaps anticipating the "answer" before the end is reached!

I think Zen sometimes speaks in terms of jumping from the top of a hundred foot pole without a safety net! Perhaps we all seek a "faith" that tells us that there is indeed a "net"..................which is not, in Zen terms, the dropping of body and mind that it seeks. (Perhaps the net is "spiritual materialism" in its subtlest form!)

Anyway, the path goes on.
Thanks
Derek
 
Derek,


I seem to remember that D.T Suzuki once remarked to Merton: "Tom, you will never understand Zen unless you read Eckhart"

As you say, as long as we desire a faith there by reason alone must exist a non-faith to overcome, placing us squarely into multiplicity. Since I am not in danger of trancending human understanding, and moving into the higher planes of existence (at least this morning) anytime soon, I am content for the moment to let my imagination soar beyond my reason.

At this stage of my growth, I often "feel" or "Intuit" beyond paradox and dichotomy to a place where there is oneness, but I certainly cannot show it outwardly except perhaps in a poem.

Maybe you have felt like that in meditation? As if your fingers could brush a higher reality, but the act of grasping seemed to push it further away, and left you feeling there was a glass ceiling above you?

Peace,
Mark
 
Mark,

Thanks.............I have read one or two accounts - in Merton's journals and letters - where Merton's meeting with Suzuki in New York was referred to...........the Eckhart referral seems to fit in.......Anyway, I do remember another phrase that Merton quoted to Suzuki that Suzuki responded to by saying "that is so important"...................."Praise be to God that I am not good!"............so relevant to my own "Pure Land" leanings!

As far as "higher planes of existence" are concerned - which you refer to in a slightly tongue in cheek fashion! - I prefer staying on the simple human plane.............I've always preferred the word "transformation" - or perhaps "transmutation" - rather than the word "transcendance".Whats in a word? Well, perhaps sometimes quite a lot!

Meditation? Slightly ambivalent towards this at the moment. After twelve years of a form of "attention to the breath" meditation I have moved toward the Pure Land "way" of practicing no formal "sitting"............seeing it as a form of "self-power"...........I try to keep a little bit quiet about this (!) as I know I gained from my twelve years of practice and would not wish to deter anyone else.............Yet "not all things are gained by seeking".......nor by "practice/sitting""..........more often we are "found", both in the present and, when reflecting, thinking back.......What few moments of "intuition" I experience or "feel" I see and understand as "gifts" rather than the result of "practice".....Anyway, whatever, you are certainly right about the "grasping" pushing it away. When "it" becomes our "own" the game is up!

Thanks again
Derek
 
Tariki said:
Spiritual materialism..................I think we may have all heard the phrase. Replacing the pursuits, desires.....whatever......of our secular society, with "spiritual" ones.

Once again I am considering/reflecting upon this aspect ofany "path"........having read some words of Thomas Merton in his introduction to his little book of verses from Chuang Tzu........"(Chuang Tzu's "way")..........a refusal to take seriously the aggressivity, the ambition, the push, and the self-importance which one must display in order to get along in society. This other is a "way" that prefers not to get anywhere in the world, or even in the field of some supposedly spiritual attainment"

In Buddhism the "argument" revolves around the fact that "desire" is seen as the root of suffering........and questions are asked, does the "desire" for enlightenment involve a contradiction of some sort?

I think perhaps it does...............yet whatever talk there is of "we are already enlightened" (or variations on the same theme!)........we do not experience ourselves as enlightened.........there is ground to be covered, a path to be walked.............

Can "spiritual materialism" be avoided?

For me, this all involves "grace"............."other-power"................that, in a very real sense, all is finally "given"........not "attained" by whatever "technique" or "practice" we care to name.........

Yet, once again, there IS ground to be covered, a path to be walked.

I am encouraged by some of the other threads here to ask my questions.

Thanks for your time.
Derek
Click to expand...
Tariki-this raises such an exquisitely and deeply meaningful paradox for me personally....reminds me of the issue of "grace" vs. "works," in Christianity, though I interpret the terms a bit differently than they were meant theologically. I realize that so much of my practice which is essentially of the zen and vipassana style is shot through with self-power and probably inadvertently reinforces the "self" I'm trying to release. Sort of like breaking out of an eggshell-when the shell breaks away the inside and the outside All are in intimate contact-neither self nor Other to be found. I'm pecking away from the inside of the egg-does the pecking actually strengthen the shell? I've long thought that it takes a certain amount of effort or works to accomplish that and receive the grace awaiting in each and every moment constantly surrounding my shell. But certainly the overt reliance on other-power would be an intrinsic avenue to avoid reinforcing the shell-as well as being acknowledgment of reality that all buddhism addresses: none of us truly are self-existing, independent, and permanent entities. Interesting paradox. Good reminder for me.

Thanks, Earl
 
Howdy Derek...

Have you ever read any Dietrich Bonhoeffer? He was a Priest that Hitler had murdered. He is an incredibly interesting read, basically because he lived what he read.

I think that Bonhoeffer would say that the reason for your questions is that with the fall in the garden of Eden, we (humanity) experienced a disunion with with God. As a result of this disuinion, we are always trying to get it back. The problem is that we view good and evil from a point of view that is from us and not from God. We have essentially made ourselves a diety and believe that we know what is good and evil. That is to say that our view of good and evil is based on our own experiences and not the mind and will of God. This is why we struggle....we want to understand the will of God, but in reality we only understand our own will and our relation to it. Also we should only be concerned with the will of God. It doesnt really matter how we feel about it, good or bad, it is just our duty, and a matter of our service for the gift we have been given.

This is not to say that your questions would be answered by Bonhoeffer, but the reading may lead you in new ways of thinking.

I think that is what the great theologians were here to teach us.....that we can search and discern our own answers.

the book that I would suggest is Bonhoeffers "Ethics". It is kind of unfinished, because he was killed before he could complete it.

this probably doesnt answer any of your question.....but then again I am not the one who should answer this question.

If you do decide to read Bonhoeffer....Please let me know what you think....I think he is as good as Merton....which is great as well.

the janitor
 
Dear Earl and the Janitor,

Thanks to you both for your replies............My way is not often to answer "point for point".....more to just read, attempt to absorb, and then respond as it comes. Earl, speaking for myself - and as far as I understand it, from Pure Land "orthodoxy" (!) - the "way of the sages" - of self power - is respected and acknowledged as a genuine path. Relevant to this are some words of the Theravada elder Nyanaponika Thera in his essay "The Power of Mindfulness"....where he mentions the phrase from "The Secret of the Golden Flower"......."If one attains intentionally to an unintentional state one has comprehension"....and sees this as echoing the Pali phrase......"By premeditated intentional effort spontaneity can be won". Personally I fully acknowledge the legitamacy of the way of effort............leading to the moment of "path entry" - of "attainment" - when effort itself reaches the end of its scope and falls away. Having said that, my own path, looking back,has been a deep search for true faith and trust.........this became more and more obvious to me as I "progressed"..............The Pure Land way of "returning to the foolish self to be saved by Amida" began to speak to this search ( not to mention also speaking to the ingrained conceit that has always tormented me)
"Seeking to beg a share of that which everyone has received" (Merton's words on true humility)...........such a phrase reverberates in my mind in moments of comtemplation in a way that soothes, and hopefully, heals. The Pure Land way is not for everyone - apparently this is "official doctrine"!! - and if all followed it it would falsify itself! Anyway, I waffle.........

Janitor, I was familiar with the words and life of Bonhoeffer at a certain time - many years ago during my "liberal" Christian phase - and I remember reading his letters from prison at one time......I have to admit that more often than not it is the Buddhist angle that speaks more clearly to me these days....and having done so, whatever insight is gained, this illuminates the gospel verses that are engrained on my heart............I'm afraid that "orthodox/mainstream" Christianity often leaves me cold............I appreciate that Bonhoeffer would not really come under such a banner, but just saying that with a long reading list I probably won't get around to reading the book you mentioned. Plus, more often these days, I prefer the books that offer a simple phrase that leads to contemplation and "silence" rather than long arguments and expressions of a "point of view".........Well, whatever.......

Anyway, I would have my own recommendation regarding some of the points you mentioned concerning our own will and "good" and "evil"..........Thomas Merton's introduction to his own little book on Chuang-Tzu, where he contrasts the outlook of Confucious with that of Chuang-Tzu.........the sedate path of the sage who seeks the spontaeous expression of the ethical, with the way of "wu-wei"...."non-doing".........which is the only true way, the way of Tao.........Merton is to my mind very profound and subtle in his words..........well worth a look..........and for Earl.

Well, enough waffle..........sunday dinner calls.............and there is a bathroom to be decorated!

Thanks
Derek
 
Tariki, thank you so much for your reply. have always loved how you cross-elucidate the insights of more theistic religions with Pure Land thought. Of the various buddhist schools, I know the least re Shin or Pure Land Buddhism. But this recent post encouraged me to review what I had on hand & give it thought again. What got my attention was the Shin notion of "shinjin," which you could edlucidate far better than me, but which actually encapsulates my view of apophatic christian mysticism. "Shinjin," true entrusting-yes that makes more sense to me than embracing more self-powered notions of enlightenment. Found these words by contemporary Shin scholar Taitetsu Unno, whom i sure you know well:
"Shinjin refers, first of all to the mind and heart of Amida Buddha. When this (mind and heart) enters our mind and heart, it enables us to entrust ourselves to the Other Power freeing us from ourselves..."

The source I consulted goes on to state..."it appears that the process of shinjin is one of understanding of the true nature of the self and understanding of the true nature of Amida, which leads to the self entrusting itself, opening itself to Amida' heart and mind, which then works within the self"...ultimately leading to the fuller or mature engagement which understands that the two are actually one and the same.

My version of Christianity would essentially entail substituting the word "God" for "Amida" & attempt to live by the Mesiter Eckhart motto: "All God asks of yoou is to move out of yourself and let God be God in you."

May you be blessed, Earl
 
Thank you for this very thought provoking topic and you all have expressed yourselves so well. I have wondered if there is a difference between physical poverty and spiritual poverty. In other words I think you can have enlightenment and not be in a state of physical poverty. It's all in how you view things you have in your life. I think to deny yourself isn't necessarily enlightened. Being enlightened very well could be the ability to fit into society with a deep sense of belonging and also have your physical needs well met.


 
Lightkeeper said:
Thank you for this very thought provoking topic and you all have expressed yourselves so well. I have wondered if there is a difference between physical poverty and spiritual poverty. In other words I think you can have enlightenment and not be in a state of physical poverty. It's all in how you view things you have in your life. I think to deny yourself isn't necessarily enlightened. Being enlightened very well could be the ability to fit into society with a deep sense of belonging and also have your physical needs well met.

My Ministry
Click to expand...
Hi Lightkeeper,
Welcome to CR! Your question got me thinking, and I remember Merton once pondered about this same thing. As I remember, he wondered how he as a monastic could really be poor when he had all he needed, and if there where anything he needed and did not have, he could borrow, such as a typewriter, paper, a razor or any other item he found use for.
And, as spring is coming here to the Rocky Mountains, I see a plethora of flowers beginning to bloom, not just one or two blue flowers but an abundance! Dozens of reds, yellows, purples! Obviously, God believes in abundance.
I think the problem comes in when we place our attention on the effect rather than the cause, this is what spiritual materialism really is.
When we look at, and concern ourselves with the manifestation of abundance and forget its source we deny God.

Peace,
Mark
 
Yes, welcome Lgihtkeeper & thanks for your thoughts, Paladin. Perhaps one way to think re self and other power is to see it as somewhat symonymous with thinking of the Divine as re to the "poles" of immanence and transcendence. from a resource I have comes the intriguing comment: "Transcendence without immanence cuts us off from the Divine. Immanence without transcendence cuts the Divine off from us." It seems like it is the ironic Reality that when we think only of immanence, there may be a subtle tendency to reinforce too strongly our sense of self which must be sacrificied/"transcended" in order to find and embody the Divine more fully-more of a self-power thing. But, if we think only in transcendent terms, may subtly reinforce the chasm we believe exists between mundane form and the Divine which does not ultimately exist. Always liked the term, "theophany-" forms revealing "God." That when we can hold together form and formlessness, immanence and transcendence, we see they are not so divergent.

This resource also quotes a couple of medieval Christian mystics in this regard:
St. John of the Cross spoke of how God may be present in the soul in three ways. The first is God's presence in essence and "dwells in all souls as it is this presence that gives them life and being. This presence never fails in the soul." The second manner of God's presence is by grace, when He "dwells in the souls pleased and satisfied with it." The third kind of presence is by means of "spiritual affection, for God is want to show His presence in many devout souls in diverse ways of refeshment, joy, and gladness." Further, resource quotes Therea of Avila as saying, "Of the first kind of Divine presence we can never be deprived. The second we must procure for ourselves with all the powers of our soul. The third is not within our power. God gives to whom He pleases."
Take care, Earl
 
Thank you to you all...........glad that this little topic has provoked a few responses.........for me it seems to get to the heart of so many paradox's (paradoxi?!) that seem to beset the heart when "enlightenment" is more aspiration than accomplishment!!

(Anyway, there is nothing like a little home decorating to bring a budding Pure Lander back down to earth.............just where did all my equanimity go?!)

As Earl has said, Shinjin lies at the heart of the Pure Land way, at least in Shinran's thought. True entrusting, "true" because it is the trust of Amida bestowed upon us............yet, again as Earl has indicated, at heart, non-dual

"O Saichi, won't you tell us about Other Power?
Yes, but there is neither Other Power nor self-power.
What is, is the graceful acceptance only"

There is a line from a Christian poet,John Donne, where he asks......"Grace,if thou repent, thou shalt not lack. Yet who shall give ye that grace to begin?" And the words from the NT (Ephesians) that we were "chosen before the foundations of the world", and , as Bishop Tutu has said, these words tell us that nothing we can do can make God love us more, nothing we can do can make God love us less. "Self" and "other" all jumbled in time, yet united within some eternal dimension.........D T Suzuki has said that "everything is empty from the beginning".......to strive to become emtpy will always involve paradox/contradiction. And just to throw in another thought....comparison......it brings to mind the two verses used in the "competion" to decide who should become the Sixth Patriach:-

Shen Hsui......"The body is the Bodhi-tree, the mind is like a clear mirror standing. Take care to wipe it all the time, Allow no grain of dust to cling to it"

Hui Neng........"The Bodhi is not like a tree, The clear mirror is nowhere standing. Fundamentally not one thing exists: Where then is a garin of dust to cling?"

Hue Neng "won"...........and just why Thomas Merton explains in his perceptive essay "Mystics and Zen Masters"

Just a few words I was reading in the book of verses from Chuang-Tzu which seem relevant.........

"If you persist in trying
To attain what is never attained
(It is Tao's gift!)
If you persist in making effort
To obtain what effort cannot get;
If you persist in reasoning
About what cannot be understood,
You will be destroyed
By the very thing you seek.

To know when to stop
To know when you can get no further
By your own action,
This is the right beginning!"

"To know when to stop"..............all I experience is the "effort" to understand. "Who shall give ye that grace to begin?" "Not all things are found by searching"...........



Anyway,the point raised about material poverty/spiritual poverty reminded me of the following story.............

Ibrahim Adham, a Sufi, lived in great pomp and slendour. A wandering dervish castigated him, saying that he was surrounded by luxury and material wealth, surprised that even his tents were fixed with golden pegs. Ibrahim nevertheless welcomed the dervish and asked his servants to feed him well. After some time he asked the dervish if he wished to accompany him to Mecca. The dervish agreed and they set off. They had not gone far when the dervish suddenly remembered that he had left his wooden cup in Ibrahim's tent, and wanted to go back and fetch it. Ibrahim smiled and said, "My friend. I left all my wealth behind without the least worry. Yet you are so attached to a cup of practically no value that you cannot procced to Mecca without it. The golden pegs which so much surprised you were driven into the earth, not into my heart."


Thanks
Derek
 
I agree with the abundance statement. We might God is abundance. Why then have monks chosen to take a vow of poverty. I think denying yourself would be against anything God would want for humans. I think we might find that the healthier we are inwardly the more we will draw to us.
 
"Abundance".............the word triggered the thought of some words of a rabbi, who said......."On the Day of Judgement we will be asked to give an account of all those things we might have enjoyed but never did." Certainly gives a fresh twist to the word "judgement"............

Well, I must apologise for just offering a string of quotes............rather than original thought! But Earls comments re the holding in tension (the poles) of immanence and transcendance seem relevant to the idea of Shinjin, as understood by Shinran, the founder of Jodo Shin Shu. I'll just offer a few definitions as per the "Glossary of Shin Buddhist Terms" in the "Complete Works of Shinran"...............

Shinjin:- One's entrusting to Amida's Primal Vow,which is at the same time the negation of one's calculative thinking, brought about by Amida's working.

(Primal Vow.......The working of Amida Buddha (dharma-body as compassionate means) issuing forth as the profound desire, wish, or prayer from the deepest source of life itself, dharma-body as suchness, to free all beings from the weight of karmic evil in the ocean of birth-and-death.)

The definition of Shinjin continues......"It denotes the central religious experience of Shin Buddhism, and literally means one's "true, real, and sincere heart and mind" which is given by Amida Buddha. This heart-mind has basically two aspects: a nondichotomous identity wherein the heart and mind of Amida and the heart and mind of the practicer are one, and a dichotomous relationship wherein the two are mutually exclusive and in dynamic interaction...................Shinjin is not simple identity....according to Shinran the mind of Amida Buddha is true, real, and sincere, while the minds of foolish beings are empty and transitory...........shinjin is the oneness of that which is true and real with its exact opposite. They are one and yet two, they are two and yet one.............expressed religiously,the oneness of shinjin expresses the working of great compassion taking person's of evil into itself, never to abandon them................this teaching is not "salvation by faith" for shinjin is not a means to salvation but salvation itself.........."

I find theses definitions very relevant to the discussion here as it has unfolded.........(Personally I take "Amida" as a personification of Reality-as-is............well, I'll leave it now.) Time for thought........
 
I was just musing on the thought of "abundance"........of where the "abundance" lies? In all that is there to be enjoyed, or in those that are here to "enjoy" it? Such an infinite variety of human beings. Some living lives of great simplicity..........poverty. Some tasting every joy!

And of the words of the Christian mystic Meister Eckhart...."They can truly enjoy the feast who would just as willingly fast"
 
Netscape Search Chogyam Trungpa, (Tibetan Buddhist), originated the term spiritual materialism and his explanation about such can be found in this link. Much of Derek's postings to this thread related to Jodoshinshu and he sparked my interest in learning more about it. I went on quite a study binge regarding it later.:) I miss you Derek. earl
 
Trungpa's book is a must read for anyone interested in taking their understanding further.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top