Holy Books, the Christian Mystics and Other Ramblings (not for the fainthearted)

Browsing through the latest offering of ebooks "inspired by my browsing history" ( as the saying goes ) there was a book concerned with demonstrating that Islam was, lock stock and smoking barrel, a religion of war. From the blurb it appeared to argue the point by copious quotes from the Koran. Well, Holy Books are not really my thing ( at least, not nowadays ) and my reading of the Koran, while reasonably extensive, is not accompanied by pleasant memories of inspirational passages; in fact  I would use the word turgid. Maybe, as some suggest, it must be read in the Arabic, "God's chosen tongue". So I am not seeking to defend the Koran.

Will the real Jidad please stand up

Nevertheless, in defence of Islam, if to read its Book, assess its content and from such insist it can only ever be a "religion of war", then, given my own  reading of the New Testament ( about seven times right through, plus various commentaries by all sorts - from fundamentalist to liberal scholarship ) I would have to insist that Christianity can only be a religion of world denial; this in as much as the entire NT is written in the atmosphere of "these are the end times, get ready folks, the game is up".

The End Times, or "Up, Up and Away"

Yet the many Christians who now live affirming the value of this world ( the "we believe in a life before death" folk ) would argue differently. And, just so, the many Moslems who live lives of peace, and in seeking communion with all - no matter their faith - argues against the thesis of the book I mentioned here at the beginning. 

I only add that I leave it with the beliefs of the various adherents of Holy Books as to how they equate their lives and attitudes with the actual text of their chosen "word of God". The mind, the intellect, is certainly capable of many twists and turns - not to mention rationalisations - in seeking certitude. Often I think it would be advantageous to throw the various "holy" books into the bin and start again from scratch. But perhaps not - who knows just where some would end up starting from! (Having said that, the rank and file, the "common folk", will perhaps always confound the academics and the professional theologians who seek to direct the paths of their flocks in more "orthodox", even logical, directions)

But moving onto mysticism (for no particular reason), a word that often causes misunderstandings. From my own experience on various forums, the word "mysticism" suggests to some minds such things as rabbits being drawn from hats and magic wands. 

Is this mysticism?

No, the term is to do with those who would seek to experience the divine or ultimate reality, know their own nature, rather than merely talk about it or exhort others to "keep the faith". This does not necessarily mean they have no time for the word as text, but does mean that they are more interested in the living Word, variously known throughout the world of Faith......Tao, Atman, Brahman, Allah, whatever. 

The Christian mystic Meister Eckhart is a case in point. All his sermons given in the vernacular revolved around Biblical verses. His sermon on the Biblical verse "Blessed are the poor in spirit", part of a beatitude from the Gospels, is a profound example. Eckhart speaks of true poverty, which he says is to "know nothing, will nothing, possess nothing", this to the point where he asks God to free him from God....."Let us pray to God that he might rid us of God." In the sermon referenced he speaks of the "emptiness of spirit" that is required:-

 If it is the case that someone is free of all creatures.........if God finds a place to act in them, then we say: as long as this exists in someone, they have not yet reached the ultimate poverty. For God does not intend there to be a place in someone where He can act, but if there is to be true poverty of spirit, someone must be so free of God and all His works that if God wishes to act in the soul He must Himself be the place in which He can act, and this He is certainly willing to be. For if God finds us this poor, then God performs His own active work and we passively receive God in ourselves and God becomes the place of His work in us since God works in Himself. In this poverty, we attain again the eternal being which we once enjoyed, which is ours now and shall be for ever.

It is words such as these that make the "zen man" D T Suzuki (and other Zen Buddhists) see Eckhart as a "Dharma brother." At one time Eckhart also said that "Nothing that knowledge can grasp or desire can want is God. Where knowledge and desire end, there is darkness and there God shines." I would see such language as the bridge between "east" and "west" which some suggest will never meet. Perhaps "experience" rather than words/texts is the key to the meeting of Faiths?

Another of the Christian mystics is St John of the Cross. Once he offered the following:- "If you wish to be sure of the road you tread on then you should close your eyes and walk in the dark". I think here we get back to my previous blog, concerning diversification, and even further back, to Eliot's universal substratum, belief in which "is empty." Just do not try it when seeking to cross a busy road.

St John of the Cross

Closer to the heart and certainly closer to my own experience are the words of the English mystic, Mother Julian of Norwich, who insisted that eventually "all manner of thing shall be well." She has comforted others with the words:-

If there be anywhere on earth a lover of God who is always kept safe, I know nothing of it, for it was not shown to me. But this was shown: that in falling and rising again we are always kept in that same precious love.

Here we are in the much the same climate as in Pure Land Buddhism and some words from a "Hymn of the Pure Land Masters" by Shinran:- 

My eyes being hindered blind passions, I cannot perceive the light that grasps me; yet the great compassion, without tiring, illumines me always.

This is to drift away from "old men in the sky" and it must be emphasised that Pure Land Buddhism shares with the entire Dharma a non-theistic base. But given the words of Eckhart, perhaps words, creeds and doctrines - belief - will always divide, all part of the diversification that the Buddhist texts refer to as "a tangle of views, a thicket of views". I think love is there in all, and Eckhart said that love has no why.

 

Nor a "why"

Does love have a prescribed path that could be called an "only way"? To finish with Eckhart:- "They do him wrong who take God in one particular way; they have the way rather than God." Maybe we just need to lose ourselves along the way?

Where am I?

Postscript

Creating the Kingdom of God on earth, as it is in heaven, is the basic message of Islam. This is the true meaning of Jihad................Acts of terror are not Jihad. They violate the explicit word of God, Prophet Muhammad and the reasoned concensus of all believers. The greatest jihad is the war on injustice in one's own soul, the injustice that can conceive of terror tactics and lose all restraints and respect for the sanctity of a human life. Jihad is the reasoned struggle of each individual to work within the bounds of moral action, to extend the protection of justice equitably to every human being, irrespective of colour, creed or place of origin. Jihad is the obligation to make peace a lived reality for all human beings.................The faith I hold, the faith of Muslims, the justice we seek, is an obligation to promote and make real in each life freedom from tyranny, neglect, need, dearth and suffering. The justice we yearn for is the life blood of a humane society with dignity and freedom for all. It cannot be found by blasting innocents apart in an inferno of twisted metal and concrete. When the innocent are murdered, we all go into the dark with them. When the innocent suffer, their suffering is our own

(Ziauddin Sardar)