Accepting our mortality

I have heard it said that "existence just is" and that we should "accept our mortality".

Existence certainly just "is" but what it "is" is the question. Myself, I tend to think that once we settle upon a final answer, reach a conclusion, then we are as good as dead. 

 "Our Mortality" can be such an answer, a conclusion, certainly today when such is the "spirit of the age", breathed in the air around us - with all its implications. "When you are dead you are dead" and all that's left is "tales told by idiots, signifying nothing." Making the most of nihilism. Sorry, saying this is by no means a " judgement" or an "accusation" against anyone,  just  the thoughts of my own mind. 

But to me "embracing our mortality" are only words, but the words are weighted with assumptions. The assumptions then create our very own axioms....

 

That girls are raped, that two boys knife a third,
   Were axioms to him, who'd never heard
Of any world where promises were kept,
Or one could weep because another wept.

(W H Auden)

 

.......or others.....but whatever our axioms are, we begin to solidify as "selves", set in our ways, our anticipations, and finally the world simply comes back to us as echoes. 

 

Conveying oneself toward all things to carry out practice-enlightenment is delusion. All things coming and carrying out practice-enlightenment through the self is realization. (Dogen)

 

How do we allow the world to come to us, without our imprint upon it? Is it possible?

 

Why is their Something rather than Nothing? What is our very own Cosmology......which introduces a passage from "Zen Cosmology" by Dan Berringer:-

 

Affirmation of God does not require projection of a macro-substance, an impregnable identity, a secure foundation, to which one must cling, and which constricts the freedom of the spirit. The Buddhist deconstruction of such a God could be a service to biblical faith, overcoming a God who is substance for a God who is Spirit, and who is thus more, not less real.

Our cosmology functions as the very foundation of our conduct. We think, speak, and act in the world in accordance with what our understanding of the world is. The more our view of reality diverges from the way reality actually is, the more unreliable our thoughts, words, and deeds in reality will be. One does not need to be a scientist to recognize we would do well to establish a more reliable cosmology – and sooner rather than later.

Later on, Berringer writes:-

......as Zen contends, knowledge (epistemology) and existence (ontology) are not two different things – our ‘cosmology’ is not simply how we see the universe it is how the universe is actualized. The significance of this point is succinctly illustrated in the following observation by Hee-Jin Kim concerning Dogen’s (hence Zen’s) view of the unity of knowledge and reality: "To Dogen, mind was at once knowledge and reality, at once the knowing subject and the known object, yet it transcended them both at the same time. In this nondual conception of mind, what one knew was what one was—and ontology, epistemology, and soteriology were inseparably united."

 

The point is, such is not fixed. It is always "Now" but Now is always on the move and can never be finally captured. At least, not by words. 

What is the difference between saying that "meaning" is inherent in Reality but such meaning is unique to each, ongoing, not fixed - and saying that there is no meaning except what each unique being chooses to believe and live? Is there any difference? I tend to think that there is, but my thoughts lack clarity on the issue. 

But I am a good little Buddhist, and seek the "heartwood of the Dharma":-

So this holy life.....does not have gain, honour, and renown for its benefit, or the attainment of virtue for its benefit, or the attainment of concentration for its benefit, or knowledge and vision for its benefit. But it is this unshakeable deliverance of mind that is the goal of this holy life, its heartwood, and its end.

 

Anyway, having questioned the word "mortality" and its possible implications, I am not sneaking immortality in by the back door - in fact I'm not sneaking anything in. No conclusions. Which I can trace to the so called "Silence of the Buddha" on all metaphysical questions - any conclusion, belief, answer, is inimicable to the Holy Life , the road to the end of suffering.

There is a Biblical Proverb:- "Those who answer a thing before they hear it, it is a shame and a folly unto them."

What is it to truly "hear" a thing? Is there a "thing" to be heard once and for all and the job is done, and we wait for our eternal reward when we have said "Yes"? Or is what is to be heard constantly on the move, yet with a direction toward Buddha (as Dogen claimed). The Circle of the Way. 

Well, my rambling has taken up a half hour or so while I drink my coffee.

Positive nihilism

Will Durant

 Recently I downloaded one of the volumes of Will Durant's "History of Civilization", the volume on the Reformation. It was only 99p, cheaper than a McDonalds coffee! Quite a bargain. 

Anyway, it begins:-

Religion is the last subject that the intellect begins to understand. In our youth we may have resented, with proud superiority, its cherished incredibilities; in our less confident years we marvel at its prosperous survival in a secular and scientific age, its patient resurrections after whatever deadly blows by Epicurus, or Lucretius, or Lucian, or Machiavelli, or Hume, or Voltaire.

What are the secrets of this resilience?

The wisest sage would need the perspective of a hundred lives to answer adequately. He might begin by recognizing that even in the heyday of science there are innumerable phenomena for which no explanation seems forthcoming in terms of natural cause, quantitative measurement, and necessary effect.

 

A wise sage

Well, I'm hardly the "wisest sage" (needing paroxetine to even cope) so I can't really answer the question. 

 

On the same theme, Erwin Schrodinger - of the both dead and alive cat story - has said:-

Science cannot tell us a word about why music delights us, or why and how an old song can move us to tears.

 

This made me think of a "case" (or zen koan) in the Blue Cliff Record - case two. Which goes:-

 

Joshu spoke to the assembly, saying, “The real Way is not difficult. Just avoid choices and becoming attached. A single word can induce choice or attachment. A single word can bring clarity. I do not have that clarity.” A monk asked, “If you do not have that clarity, what do you appreciate?” Joshu replied, “I do not know that either.” “If you don’t know, how can you say you don’t have that clarity?” Joshu replied, “Asking the question was good enough. Now go.” 

 

Well, whatever you make of that, one comment found on this goes:-

 

In the old city

at the head of Grafton Street

a busker plays his fiddle.

First Brahms, then Bach

and a little Paganini for fun.

Fingers run up and down strings.

Is it the vibrating air,

his skill, or the old melodies

that bring tears to my eyes?

Tell me, I need to know. 

 

Do we really "need to know"? Maybe we do need to try to understand, however futile the effort. 

The closest I get is the pre-eminence of Grace. The word covers multitudes - from the offer of a transcendent Deity that must be "accepted" to gain His approval, to the pure rest in the "nihilism" of Buddhist "emptiness" and "suchness", known in the West only as nihilism - belief in nothing. Multitudes - an unbroken seam, with all points in-between, the Circle of the Way.

"Love has no why" Meister Eckhart.

 

Anyway, it is my wedding anniversary today. 46 years! Which reminds me of the old joke, of the guy who says:-

 "I'm more in love now than on the day I first married..........the trouble is, my wife won't give me a divorce!"

Blooks - again!

 I've spoken before about my Blooks, a cross between a blog and a book, created on free Google blog space and printed off (after editing) in France by Blookup. 

 

My latest is "The Illustrated Notebooks of Dookie" (Volume II)

 

Rather than describe the contents again, here is the "Preamble" that opens the blook:-

 

One of my Blooks that I turn to more often than not is "The Illustrated Notebooks of Dookie". A pretty random collection of quotes and excerpts from all the books that pass through my life. 

My Notebooks are filling up again and therefore another volume of various odds and ends is called for. So this it it. 

Section headings will be as random as the quotes and excerpts,  as often the notes put into the various notebooks are pretty random themselves, resulting in a glorious jumble that will often make no sense as such - but that is the way I like it. Correspondences can follow in life itself, as lived and experienced. As John Keats once wrote:-

I have never yet been able to conceive how anything can be known for truth by consecutive reasoning.

Which - at least in my mind - is from the same family as Oscar Wilde's:-

Nothing that is worth knowing can be taught.

How do we learn, grow? Through life itself - the hidden ground of love that has no explanation. The love that has no Why. Only Faith is needed, which itself is a gift.

 

Such is the Preamble. As said, the various quotes are very random and as I was quite lax in keeping note of where they came from, many have no citations. Which brings to mind the thought of whether or not the source of the quote makes the words more - or less - likely of acceptance, or agreement; and whether or not it should. Maybe the answer for me is that it "should not, but it does". 

 

There are "Poetic Interludes" in the Blook, 5 in number, some of my favorite poetry. Here is one, by Philip Larkin, called "First Sight":-

Lambs that learn to walk in snow
When their bleating clouds the air
Meet a vast unwelcome, know
Nothing but a sunless glare.
Newly stumbling to and fro
All they find, outside the fold,
Is a wretched width of cold.

As they wait beside the ewe,
Her fleeces wetly caked, there lies
Hidden round them, waiting too,
Earth's immeasureable surprise.
They could not grasp it if they knew,
What so soon will wake and grow
Utterly unlike the snow.

Not really typical of Philip Larkin, who often wrote of darker themes. So much so that when I first read it the thought of an abattoirs popped into my mind regarding the "surprise" (utterly unlike the snow) But I'm fairly sure that such was not the surprise in Larkin's mind. 

Whatever, the poem this time has brought to mind another entry in the Blook, this from Picasso:-

 

Every child is an artist; the problem is staying an artist when you grow up.

 

......which itself suggests the verse from the Good Book, that "a little child shall lead them" (while the wise are sent empty away)

Talking of trees

 Sad sight this morning walking across a nearby Recreation Park into town. My very favorite tree, an ancient horse chestnut, was being "dismantled" - chopped down by the look of it. A dog walker I spoke to said that it was suspected that it was diseased. Obviously no one wants large branches snapping and falling upon the unwary! But a rather sad sight. Not exactly a tree hugger myself but often as I have crossed the Recreation Park I have admired that tree, throughout all the seasons - and yes, just lately I have reached and touched its ancient bark and felt "one with the earth" from which it has grown, helping my mental health issues. 

Anyway, maybe a chance to share a much loved poem....

Binsey Poplars

BY GERARD MANLEY HOPKINS

(felled 1879)

My aspens dear, whose airy cages quelled,

  Quelled or quenched in leaves the leaping sun,

  All felled, felled, are all felled;

    Of a fresh and following folded rank

                Not spared, not one

                That dandled a sandalled

         Shadow that swam or sank

On meadow & river & wind-wandering weed-winding bank.

        

  O if we but knew what we do

         When we delve or hew —

     Hack and rack the growing green!

          Since country is so tender

     To touch, her being só slender,

     That, like this sleek and seeing ball

     But a prick will make no eye at all,

     Where we, even where we mean

                 To mend her we end her,

            When we hew or delve:

After-comers cannot guess the beauty been.

  Ten or twelve, only ten or twelve

     Strokes of havoc unselve

           The sweet especial scene,

     Rural scene, a rural scene,

     Sweet especial rural scene.

Obviously my favorite tree is not being felled for so called "progress" but I do love that poem and the flow of the words.

All the best to you all - and try to truly SEE the beauty that is around us - look up now and again from the mobile phone.

The Wasteland - Summary and Analysis

 I saw from Google Statistics that a prior blog entitled "The Wasteland - Summary and Analysis" was being accessed quite frequently. I looked it up and realised that it should never have been published as such - I had only posted it for my own purposes of printing it off. Publishing it was an error. I have now deleted it.

The whole thing was simply a cut and paste from a book on the poem that I assume was under copyright. 

Sorry to anyone who may be wondering where it has gone!

However, there ARE 299 other blogs to take a look at, any comments on which would be very much appreciated - also any suggested "Related Quotes" on the content. I love the quotes of others. Thank you. 

Apokatastasis - Revisited

 

Apokatastasis - the eventual restoration of all things. A bit of a mouthful yet the idea is simple. Eventually all will participate in a redeemed Cosmos. All rational creatures will find their ultimate rest in God. 

Many in the Christian Churches resist the idea of the "all" bit. They insist that many - in fact, often the vast majority - will never know such restoration, no redemption, and instead of a eternity of joy will suffer perpetually, gnashing their teeth etc etc etc. 

Good News

Apokatastasis was taught and believed in widely in the early Christian Church. Many of the Early Church Fathers taught it explicitly, and such were fully conversant with the emerging Canon of Scripture. Sadly, with St Augustine leading the way - a man unable to read the Greek in which the original New Testament was written and instead relied upon a Latin translation of dubious reliability - the Protestant Churches (influenced by the   Augustinian tradition of scriptural interpretation) dispensed with such a glorious Good News and embraced various theologies pronouncing a double destination. 

Of no particular relevance, but I like it.

Lately I have delved rather deeply into the literature now readily available on the subject of Apokatastasis. I am convinced that such a teaching is Biblical and scriptual and actually represents the heart of the Christian Faith. 

For me, it is the mythic dimension of all this that I find supportive in my own search for peace and understanding. Personally I have no allegiance - or belief - in "Jesus" and any claimed historical incarnation. As I see it, every particular contains the universal and to pick out one particular particular (!) as in some sense uniquely unique (!), as some sort of pivot on which eternity rests, simply confuses and complicates. Confuses and sadly, historically, offers only the observed reality that "only way" dogmatics can step in, a "one true Church", claiming for itself the perogative of all meaning and explanation; becoming a "Good News" of exclusion and division, rather than one of total acceptance and reconciliation.

Here I must mention a book by David Bentley Hart, "That All Shall Be Saved", in which he argues - in great depth - the Universalist case. I was quite taken by his "Third Meditation: What is a Person? A Reflection on the Divine Image." Here he touches upon the question of how it could ever be "heaven" for anyone if anyone else at all was excluded, and was in fact in a state of perpetual torment. Mr Hart argues forcefully that in fact it could never be. His arguments as to the reality of a "person" are profound and well worth looking up and reading, and centre upon the insight that we can only ever be persons in relationship with all other persons. Whatever, he sums up in quite simple words:-

"And so......if we allow the possibility that even so much as a single soul might slip away unmourned into eternal misery, the ethos of heaven turns out to be "every soul for itself" - which is also, curiously enough, precisely the ethos of hell."

Just so. 

To continue. Mythically, I find that the "restoration of all things", Apokatastasis, can be assimilated at a personal level. As such it can prove demanding. No one can be cast aside, here, now, but must be seen and known as a fellow brother or sister. No other can be seen as a "stranger". The last thing it is is a simple "feel good" teaching - rather, to perceive its implications, is to know and hear deep in the mind/heart a call to action! 

I would also add that I do not see recognition and assimilation of Apokatastas at this mythic level as in any way eclectic, a mixing of Christianity and Buddhism. It simply provides a living background for so many pieces of the puzzle to find their place

Again, there is no need of the "final restoration of all things" being some sort of ultimate conclusion or finality. What would remain in "restoration" would be the love that "knows no why" (Meister Eckhart), infinite wisdom, infinite potential. Simply Reality-as-is widening infinitely to embrace ever more of that which has been revealed/created - a constant advance into novelty.

Whatever, it acts for me as the template in which I can affirm that "all shall be well, and all shall be well, and all manner of thing shall be well" (Mother Julian of Norwich) which currently offers so much in terms of my mental health.

 Mental health wise I am truly blessed and called to recognise the comparisons between Apokatastasis and the very many other negative and divisive theologies, beliefs and faiths of our world. Between a Cosmos of positivity, where Love is ultimate and all embracing, as compared with beliefs and theologies of an ultimate Reality consisting of eternal suffering, exclusion, division and quite frankly, acting as a witness to the total failure of God's will "that all be saved" as pronounced unequivocally in so many verses of Christian scripture.

Just to add that this particular blog has not "flowed" as easily as some. It has been forced and I have struggled with the correct words - all part of my current mental health struggle, but I shall leave it as is, however stilted and even, maybe, incoherent; perhaps the consequence of the mixing of a Christian conception with so many years of Buddhist understanding. Buddhism has no eschatological dimension as such, or, at least, as D.T.Suzuki has it, it involves more the "eschatology of the present moment." Anyway, I'll leave it to sit for a while then reread it - maybe take it down or rewrite it. 

Comments would be appreciated. Thank you. 

Related quotes:-

(All from the Christian Scriptures)

So then, just as through one transgression came condemnation for all human beings, so also through one act of righteousness came a rectification of life for all human beings; for, just as by the heedlessness of the one man the many were rendered sinners, so also by the obedience of the one the many will be rendered righteous

(Romans)

For just as in Adam all die, so also in Christ all will be given life

(Corinthians)

For God shut up everyone in obstinacy so that he might show mercy to everyone

(Romans)

.....our savior God, who intends all human beings to be saved and to come to a full knowledge of truth. For there is one God, and also one mediator of God and human beings: a human being, the Anointed One Jesus, who gave himself as a liberation fee for all

(Timothy)

For the grace of God has appeared, giving salvation to all human beings.…..

(Titus)

There are many other verses. Try 2 Corinthians 5:19. Look up Ephesians 1:9-10. Again, Colossians 1:27–28, John 12:32, Hebrews 2:9, John 17:2, John 4:32, John 12:47, 2 Peter 3:9, 1 John 4:14, Philippians 2:9-11, Colossians 1:9-10, 1 John 2:2, John 3:17, Luke 16:16, 1 Timothy 4:10. 

Sadly, such positive verses that proclaim/imply the eventual restoration of all things, of all human beings, are passed over, even dismissed, by those whose allegiance has already been given to doctrines of division, which are in fact supported by far fewer verses - all of which can be negated/explained by greater knowledge of context and of the original Greek in which the New Testament was written. But I know from personal experience that such "vulture evangelists" are deaf to any such entreaties to look again at the actual words of the book they call "God's Word". 

Just recently one such spoke of salvation not being 99.9999999% the work of God, but was in fact 100% God's work. Alas, his "Bible Study", centred upon the Protestant Reform Tradition, blinds him to the logical implications of this. i.e Universal Salvation. Apokatastasis.  Thus he in fact trusts in a non-existent .00000001% for his own Salvation, trusts his own "works" of "belief", and as yet, is blind to Grace and the full 100% workings of God, Reality-as-is.

As a final related quote, an excerpt from one of the very many fine books now readily available on this whole subject, written by Christians whose fidelity to Christ - and to scripture - is unquestionable. This from "Destined For Joy: The Gospel of Universal Salvation" by Alvin F Kimel:-

"Why do we not hear this message (i.e. of Universal Salvation) of the astonishing love of God every Sunday, Sunday after Sunday, in our Churches? This is the gospel. There is no other gospel worth preaching, no other gospel worth hearing. In a world filled with wickedness, suffering, despair, and death, we desperately need to hear the proclamation of the omnipotent power of God’s love and mercy. We need to know that he treasures us, that he has a plan for us, that his saving will for the world will triumph. Only thus does it become possible for us to cooperate with him in prayer and good works. In the words of the great Catholic theologian Hans Urs von Balthasar: 

'Love alone is credible; nothing else can be believed, and nothing else ought to be believed. This is the achievement, the ‘work’ of faith: to recognize this absolute prius, which nothing else can surpass; to believe that there is such a thing as love, absolute love, and that there is nothing higher or greater than it; to believe against all the evidence of experience . . . against every ‘rational’ concept of God, which thinks of him in terms of impassibility or, at best, totally pure goodness, but not in terms of this inconceivable and senseless act of love.'

Without the preaching of the boundless love of God enfleshed in Jesus Christ, crucified and risen, the Church has no reason to exist; indeed, it is this word of love that creates the new life that is the Church. Without love, there is no theosis, no repentance, no sanctification, only Pharisaic zeal and deadly dogmatism."

Postscript:-

I can understand how many reading of such things will simply dismiss it entirely. Of the "when you are dead you are dead" school of much modern atheism, they will return to the entirely secular. I'm almost with them. But I do not understand those of "belief" who reject it in favour of other theologies of judgement and division. Yet, having said I do not understand, maybe I do. Such are the indoctrinated, those fed a theology from childhood, who have come to identify their very own beliefs and reading of scripture with salvation itself. Thus to question any of it is to question their own assurance of salvation - this they dare not do, out of fear of the God of their imagination and conditioning. At heart, they only know of, and rely upon, their own "works" of allegiance to a set of words and beliefs, and sadly - as yet - know nothing of Grace. 

Happy days

Recently a stray Muslim ventured onto a Forum that I frequent. There are only a few weirdo's like myself on the Forum, but the guy (I presume "guy" - although that I think covers all genders nowadays - I can't really keep up with it) He is basically posting spam, seeking to engage with those with the temerity to question the proclamation of any particular Islamic Imam, both of today or of the past. A quite pointless pursuit on this particular Forum, no one actually giving a hoot. This guy's posts have been called spam (remember the fine old Monty Python song, the lyrics of which go something like this:-

"Spam, spam, spam, spam

Spam, spam, spam, spam")

Take your pick

Catch the video on Youtube if you like, the entire sketch is quite funny, even if the words of the song are a bit repetitive.

But this poster is not to be deterred. He continues to argue Islamic dogmatics, each point supported by videos.

Well, I waffle, but I have tried to engage with this guy....a sample below (after a few words from Seneca):-

Hello again *******, is there actually a human being there? Can you respond, inter-act, with others? Are you human flesh and blood?

Me, I'm in McDonald's now, fortified with caffeine, and ready to go again.

I'm not totally against pouring over ancient books, looking for guidance and inspiration. Maybe once I looked for "truth" there, but "truth" is a nebulous thing, always on the move, and ultimately not found in letters. Jesus was once asked:- "What is truth" and gave no answer. In fact, he did, in as much as the truth is a human being, and a human being was standing there in the dock - sadly, where most human beings stand, fearing and waiting for the judgement of their peers, the theologians, and anyone else who wants to hurl the first stone.

Jesus with the adulteress - What was written?

But, whatever, no, not totally against "searching the scriptures daily" for just maybe life can be found in them. I love Jewish history, and the various stories of the rabbis, who would often, in the ghettos and hiding from persecution, would dispute joyously with each other over the words of the Law, which they loved. Throwing verses at each other, rejoicing at what they found revealed to them, there, then, in ancient words. They did this in Warsaw, before the Nazi's came and destroyed their lives and culture, before being hauled off to be turned into soap or pillow stuffing by the Master Race, the  Ubermensch of Nietzsche. But I think, back then, among themselves, rejoicing in the Law, the word became Word. In human hearts.

Children's art from a Jewish ghetto, pre WW2 - where did the children go?

But the Word is always on the move. Sorry, people like yourself, in effect turn the words to stone, then use the stones to throw at others who just might understand them in some other way.

An alternative to stones

Doesn't every Surah in the Quran begin with "Allah, the all merciful"? Can't you just leave it there and stop all the nonsense? Just understand those simple words? Why does anyone really want a commentary? But whatever, good luck with your own "deeds", hope your "reward" is to your satisfaction, that the decision goes in your favour.

Well, I ramble. I waffle. Maybe a bit of William Blake, who spoke to angels. From "The Everlasting Gospel":-

The Vision of Christ that thou dost see

Is my Visions Greatest Enemy

Thine has a great hook nose like thine

Mine has a snub nose like to mine 

Thine is the Friend of All Mankind

Mine speaks in parables to the Blind

Thine loves the same world that mine hates

Thy Heaven doors are my Hell Gates

 

And:-

What was it that he brought to Light

That Plato & Cicero did not write 

The Heathen Deities wrote them all

These Moral Virtues great & small

What is the Accusation of Sin

But Moral Virtues deadly Gin

The Moral Virtues in their Pride 

 Did over the World triumphant ride

In Wars & Sacrifice for Sin

And Souls to Hell ran trooping in

The Accuser Holy God of All

This Pharisaic Worldly Ball 

 Amidst them in his Glory Beams

Upon the Rivers & the Streams

Then Jesus rose & said to me

Thy Sins are all forgiven thee

William Blake - who spoke with Angels

Well, there you go. Stick with that Pharisaic Worldly Ball if you so wish, keep pouring over the words, seeking to prove yourself "right", win a few arguments, feel satisfied that you are in the camp of the "right-thinkers". 

Must go.