Jnanic Renunciation
I find the article you sent me an exceptionally interesting piece. It’s the best apologia you’ve yet provided for your own modus operandi, which is to remain spiritually engaged with the news of the day.
I do wonder, though: is it really only monks who may conscientiously ignore the world? Are the rest of us truly obliged to be always on the informational alert and up to date? Must our renunciation otherwise prove (as you claim) merely “fantastical” and “egotistical”. Why can’t spiritually serious people who must live and work in the world remain humbly, and not pridefully, ignorant of “what’s going on”.
I’m reminded of a footnote in Schuon’s Transcendent Unity of Religions. It seems to me what you’re recommending is (to use his language) a “bhaktic” mode of renunciation:
The life of the great bhakta Shri Ramakrishna provides a very instructive example of the “bhaktic” mode of Knowledge. The saint wished to understand the identity between gold and clay; but instead of starting out from a metaphysical datum, which would have enabled him to perceive the vanity of riches, as a jnânin would have done, he kept praying to Kali to cause him to understand this identity by a revelation: “Every morning, for many long months, I held in my hand a piece of money and a lump of clay and repeated: Gold is clay, and clay is gold. But this thought brought no spiritual work into operation within me; nothing came to prove to me the truth of such a statement. After I know not how many months of meditation, I was sitting one morning at dawn on the bank of the river, imploring our Mother to enlighten me. All of a sudden the whole universe appeared before my eyes clothed in a sparkling mantle of gold. . . . Then the landscape took on a duller glow, the color of brown clay, even lovelier than the gold. And while this vision engraved itself deeply on my soul, I heard a sound like the trumpeting of more than ten thousand elephants, who clamored in my ear: Clay and gold are but one thing for you. My prayers were answered, and I threw far away into the Ganges the piece of gold and the lump of clay.”
If I understand what you’re saying, you think the jnânin of our day must in fact be a bhakta, for keeping abreast of events and issues, political and otherwise, with a view to understanding their underlying causality seems to me analogous to repeating “for many long months … gold is clay, and clay is gold”, whereas in fact the causality in question is an a priori “metaphysical datum” and can be seen as such without having to slog one’s through the news. I for one would still like to hold out for that vocational possibility, even (or perhaps especially) in these ever darkening days.
Speaking of monks and ever darkening days, I recently had an opportunity to speak with a disciple of a disciple of the Elder Joseph the Hesychast. We were talking about ascetical struggle, and indirectly (I suppose) about modes of renunciation. This man had told me once before that the Elder was “the last of the great ascetics”, and in this conversation he observed that “for hundreds of years the greatest saints came from the ranks of ascetics”. So, I asked the obvious question: is there then no hope in our day for “great saints” to arise?
The monk’s reply was to say: Oh, yes, of course, there will be great saints in our day, but they won’t be ascetics…. They’ll be confessors and martyrs!
Buckle your seat belt.
July 23rd, 2012 at 6:02 am
No doubt a willful ignorance of the details of the state of the world can indeed amount to “fantastical” and “egotistical” renunciation in some cases. On the other hand, keeping abreast of those details as a form of “spiritual engagement” can be nothing more than thinly-veiled mental dissipation. I think the latter scenario is at least as likely as the former, and even more dangerous, considering that so much of what passes for “news” these days is firmly in the realm of the absurd, and even the surreal. It seems to me that only a saint could (if he had a valid reason) delve into that cesspool without spiritual damage, not to speak of a lesser person gleaning spiritual profit from it.
July 27th, 2012 at 8:59 pm
I’ve been following this discussion with great interest. I agree with your position, and you state it very well. It does, though, seem to me that the positions are a bit schematic and indurate.
You ask: must we keep up with all the current events of the political world, or may we “conscientiously ignore” it? You conclude that the latter is a “vocational possibility,” and suggest that it’s the more sensible spiritual approach for our particular times. But I think you’re missing something here.
The saints and sages of history tell us that the world will destroy us and steal our souls if we let it. And yet, here we are in the world, and not by our choice. God has placed us in this world, so our existence here must have some utility in the divine economy. Could it be that we are in the world to ignore it and avoid it? I think not. Could it be that we are here to fully embrace it at its on level? Certainly that is a diabolical idea and would lead to our destruction. So how can this be understood?
The issues are real, but the notion of a binary choice between full engagement and complete withdrawal is false. For the serious seeker these are esoteric issues not reducible to behavioral imperatives. These are issues for each spiritual traveler to decide for himself on the basis of his intelligence, his knowledge, and his council from a competent spiritual guide, who can help him weigh these issues for the good of his own soul.
Certainly the world is a monster that will destroy us if we let it.
But, but, . . .
The invisible things of Him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead (Romans 1:20).
Thou seest not in the creation of the All-merciful any imperfection? Return thy gaze; seest thou any fissure? Then return thy gaze again, and again, and thy gaze comes back to thee dazzled, aweary (Koran 67:3,4).
Any temporal things or creatures manifesteth or remindeth us of God or Eternity; for the creatures are a guide and a path unto God and Eternity (Theologia Germanica, 50).
July 29th, 2012 at 2:52 pm
I don’t watch the news or even turn on a TV except on rare occasions. But I don’t feel any need to justify my habits in this regard by reference to spiritual principles. I do agree with Thurbolt Smagg that it’s a matter for each person to decide for himself. I just feel that because of my particular sensibilities, at this time, I choose not to expose myself to the news. Why should anything more need to be said?
I try to be as aware as I can of my intentions and of what I am doing or not doing. Isn’t that really the bottom-line in the spiritual life—just being present here and now with as good intentions as possible rather than getting involved in a debate about whether I should do A or B? In the end, does it really matter whether I watch the news? And doesn’t the debate tend to take me out of the moment? Well, maybe it doesn’t for the rest of you, but I know that it does for me!