The Juiciness and Messiness of Life Itself

I was reading recently about Carl Jung and it was said that he was never "compulsively consistent" in his thinking and writing. Which I would see as a good thing. As another said, many academics, philosophers - not to mention theologians - can become far too systematic and rigid and therefore miss the "juiciness and messiness of life." 

A juicy orange

I think this was in the mind of Thomas Merton when he wrote the following:- 

But the magicians keep turning the Cross to their own purpose. Yes, it is for them too a sign of contradiction: the awful blasphemy of the religious magician who makes the Cross contradict mercy. This of course is the ultimate temptation of Christianity. To say that Christ has locked all doors, has given one answer, settled everything and departed, leaving all life enclosed in the frightful consistency of a system outside of which there is seriousness and damnation, inside of which there is the intolerable flippancy of the saved - while nowhere is there any place left for the mystery of the freedom of divine mercy which alone is truly serious, and worthy of being taken seriously.

(From "Raids on the Unspeakable")

For me this all has to do with the Pure Land way of learning around the kitchen sink where things can often get messy. I think sometimes we can insist upon a "solution" or system and then force it upon life itself according to the system's theories. But life can have its own lessons which are then missed. Well, I'm waffling but I know what I mean!

Trying to bring together a few thoughts from previous blogs, for me I see that it has much to do with first beginning with Being itself*, then allowing diversification. Or, in "religious" language, beginning with faith, that all shall be well, then branching out into life itself, where we can let go and possibly agree with Antono Machado that "Mankind owns four things that are no good at sea; rudder, anchor, oars, and the fear of going down." 

Where does such faith come from and how do we get it? In the Pure Land Rennyo said:-

Faith does not arise within ourselves. 

The Entrusting Heart is itself 

Given by the Other Power  

Is this "election" as in some forms of Christianity? No, in the non-dual world of Buddhism it is Universalism. ALL have the gift; all ARE the gift. It is in how we come to realise it that creates the danger of systems, paths, and the battles of religion and inquisitions - this when diversification comes first, and we seek to piece together a "one way" for all.

O Saichi, will you tell us of Other Power?

Yes, but there is neither self power nor other power.

What is, is the graceful acceptance only.

Saichi, the Pure Land "saint"- myokonin - was a cobbler by trade

Here we have in picture form two "ways", of dualism and non-dualism:- 

The very first verse of the Tao te Ching explains......

The Way that can be walked is not the eternal Way.

The name that can be named is not the eternal name.

The nameless is the beginning of Heaven and Earth.

The named is the mother of all things.

Therefore:

Free from desire you see the mystery.

Full of desire you see the manifestations.

These two have the same origin but differ in name.

That is the secret,

The secret of secrets,

The gate to all mysteries.

Or not.

*As amplification, the words of Thomas Merton, drawn from an essay in his book "Zen and the Birds of Appetite":-

 "....let us remind ourselves that another......consciousness is still available to modern man. It starts not from the thinking and self-aware subject but from Being, ontologically seen to be beyond and prior to the subject-object division. Underlying the subjective experience of the individual self there is an immediate experience of Being......it is completely nonobjective.....not "consciousness of" but pure consciousness......".   (Merton's italics)