dharmatalks

In his book, God and State, author Mikhail Bakunin observes:

“All religions, with their gods, their demi-gods, and their prophets, their messiahs and their saints, were created by the prejudiced fancy of men who had not attained the full development and full possession of their faculties.”

I found that observation to particularly resonate with me, and did not see anything derogatory in it at all. But then, because my doctorate is in theological anthropology, I recognise my tendency toward interpreting what I experience, read, hear and see through the lens of an anthropologist. For me, therefore, this was a simple, straightforward and extremely accurate observation.

A good and respected colleague of mine – himself a bishop in the autocephalous sacramental movement – was put-off by the post, calling it a “cheap shot”, and adding, “For me, most of the new atheist movement is little more than ego run amok and a need to establish (falsely) that nothing transcends me. It’s easy to take a cheap shot at good people who happen to believe differently than we do, or to characterize them as somehow defective or uninformed.”

Whenever I see such a strong response, I generally recognise that is a sign that something struck a “nerve” for the other person, triggering an emotional response, rather than rational dialogue. And that is an important opportunity to learn more about that person, and for them, if they are receptive to it, to possibly challenge their own perspective.

My position is clear… or is it?

It occurred to me that while I perceived the non-theistic framework from which I engage in spiritual practice, and which serves as the basis of my teaching, as being readily apparent and understood, it might not be. Perhaps my perception was way off-base, and people really didn’t quite understand from where I was coming.

So let me begin by sharing a little about that framework, which serves as the foundational framework for all of my teaching. Here are the ideas, beliefs and guiding principles from which I strive to operate:

• I believe that primitive humanity, whose intelligence was limited, whose understanding was guided by myths and superstitions, and whose faculties were not yet full developed, often created these mythical gods, demi-gods, messiahs and saints as a means of explaining what they otherwise could not.

  It is one thing, to regard a “saint” as a good and wise person, whose life we hold up as an example, such as the life of Buddha Sakyamuni, Rav Yeshua ben Yusef (Jesus), his Mother Miriam, Teresa of Avila, Francis of Assisi, Je Tsongkhapa, Neem Karoli Baba, Sri A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada, Mother Teresa of Calcutta, and Mychal Judge, OFM. But this is not what Bakunin is talking about. He’s talking about the mythical and superstitious “cult of the saints”, and the way in which the institutional church hijacked the legends and mythos of the pagan cultures, turning Ireland’s beloved Brighid (Fraid, in Wales) into “St. Bridget of Kildare”, and Constantine’s Sol Invictus into the legendary Son of God.

  There is nothing in Mikhail Bakunin’s quotation that is inaccurate. These legends and myths were created by ignorant, fearful, superstitious and spiritually immature persons. And from the time that they were created, those whose spirituality and philosophy has lacked that certain level of maturity – those who feel compelled to turn toward imaginary external beings, rather than celebrating these archetypes as aspects of our own incredible Inner Nature – have clung to and vehemently defended their beliefs as “truth”.

  He did not, as my friend accused him, call those people “stupid”. Each of us is functioning with a certain level of ignorance in one regard or another, and so some of our beliefs, or practices, and our perceptions are borne out of ignorance. And the belief in an imaginary external being, be that a god(dess), demi-urge, saviour or spirit, is an example of that kind of unhealthy and unwhole thinking.

• I personally believe that the Universe is spiritual and numenal. [I differentiate between the material universe, in which our Milky Way exists, with a lower-case “u”, while the Universe – the limitless and eternal principle – I refer to with an upper-case “U”.] I believe this Universe is Love or what I often call Creative Intelligence and has beauty, purpose and order. And I believe that all phenomena, including all sentient beings, all places, and all things emanate from this Creative Intelligence/Love.
• While I may not consider the particular ideologies of all spiritual traditions to be healthy, wholesome or particularly true or useful, I choose mindfully to honour all spiritual paths, because they are part of the tapestry of the human heart.

  When a five year-old child says that they believe in Santa Claus, we don’t become indignant, because we, in our maturity, know Santa Claus is a legend. Our response should be no different, I believe, toward those whose spiritual and personal maturity still needs to believe that there is a “God”, and that the stories and legends about Rav Yeshua in the New Testament of their Bible are “historical and true”. Why not simply regard them with the same loving care that we would that small child, recognising that it is their brokenness, their fear and their delusional/dualistic mindset, which guides their spiritual path?

• I am not an atheist, because I don’t choose to identify my spiritual path by a set of descriptors that tell you what I am “not”. I am non-theistic… that is to say that I don’t concern myself with the god-concept at all, and don’t find contemplating such things to be useful, helpful or purposeful.
• My spiritual path is purposeful. I pursue, study and engage my spiritual practice for one reason – to realise Enlightenment for the purpose of alleviating suffering in all sentient beings. Nothing else. Nothing less. I don’t practice because I want to please my guru. I don’t practice to achieve or attain anything I don’t already possess (Enlightenment is already our True Nature, we have only to awaken and realise it). I don’t do it for “salvation” or some other fear-based superstition.
• My religion is Compassion. My “god” is Love. My path, while it has been called Buddhist, Contemplative, New Thought, Progressive Catholic, Universalist, Metaphysical, Hindu, Wiccan or Jain, is actually the path of service, loving-kindness, forgiveness and healing. I celebrate and acknowledge those traditions as part of the diverse tapestry of my personal spiritual heritage. I honour my role as a “successor to the apostles” with the same reverence and respect that I give the lineage of my Buddhist teachers from the Tibetan and Japanese Zen traditions. Technically, I teach what could best be called a syncretic, Western synthesis of Buddhism, influenced by the Tibetan Rime Movement, Eastern Catholic Mysticism (without the theistic trappings), and New Thought.

  This approach pisses off many respected and popular teachers in the Buddhist and Catholic sects. And it always will, I suspect. The reason seems to be that these teachers lack a certain security in their tradition and path, and need to attack, ridicule and denigrate the teachings of anyone they (delusionally) perceive as a threat to their “authority” or credibility. It’s really quite sad.

  And so they will insist that only those dharma teachers who teach a “pure dharma”, and come from this lineage or that are “safe” to listen to. The technical term for this is sectarian bullshit and drama. It’s baseless, superstitious and without merit.

  I would never encourage someone to abandon their primary spiritual teacher or path, if that teacher or path are serving them well. Neither would I ever consider attacking another person’s teacher, for doing so would dishonour my own teachers.

After reading my response about spiritual and personal maturity, my friend went on to ask:

Are we to extrapolate that the Dalai Lama isn’t spiritually mature because of his confessed belief in hell realms that we might see as psychological states? Maturity is dependent on cultural factors. What is mature behavior in one place would be found odd in another. I prefer not to go there and to focus on our commonality in hopes of generating dialogue. Labeling others gets in the way of that, in my experience. Once we have labeled the other as other, why in the world would they want to sit with us?

My response to his question is, “Yes, I would view a literal belief in hell realms as spiritually immature and superstitious, whether it was a belief espoused by the Dalai Lama, Rav Yeshua, Buddha Sakyamuni or the Amazing Kreskin. Period.” However, having had the privilege of his audience, in a smaller group setting at the monastery in Atlanta, I question whether His Holiness actually believes in these things from a literal perspective, or if he understands them as metaphors, and like many progressive spiritual teachers (my friend the bishop included) uses the common language of the people to express ideas in a culturally relevant context. (I apologise for being vague here, because I am unsure how much of a personal conversation I had with His Holiness would be considered privileged dialogue. So I will simply leave it at that.)

Implications for the Living Dharma Community

So what are the implications of this path for students of the Living Dharma Community?

The foundation of our spiritual path is undeniably the essential teaching of the Buddha Sakyamuni – particularly, the Four Noble Truths and the Noble Eightfold Path.  We also draw deeply from the contemplative practices of the Desert Fathers and Desert Mothers, living in the rich solitude of the African sketes.

We interpret those essential teachings through a non-theistic lens, paying attention to opportunities to make that teaching more accessible and relevant in a postmodern world.

Our path is certainly informed by the New Thought tradition of the nineteenth century, whose legacy includes such luminaries as Ralph Waldo Emerson, Judge Thomas Troward, Walt Whitman, Phineas Quimby, Emma Curtis Hopkins, Eckhart Tolle, Louise L. Hay and Dr. Kennedy Shultz.

Our traditions… now that is something altogether different, and somewhat unique.

We are a post-denominational, non-sectarian, intentional spiritual community. We celebrate, honour and incorporate the ancient wisdom of all the spiritual traditions through the ages. Individuals are free to participate in and practice any of these traditions, or none at all, recognising that it is our actual spiritual practice, not the traditions we use to celebrate them, which makes the difference and matters.

We choose to be a visionary community — knowing and affirming that everything we experience in the seemingly external world has its origins in Thought.

We encourage personal initiative, investigation and growth. Our sole purpose as teachers and as community are to serve as catalysts for spiritual growth and personal transformation.

We are acutely aware of the problems of the whole planet (global warming, destruction of rainforests, overpopulation, lack of ecological sustainability, exploitation of people in poorer countries) and want to see more action taken to heal these situations.

And finally, as our brother pointed out, we recognise our dualistic and delusional tendency to imagine and label those with whom we interact as "other". We affirm that only by learning to be more mindful, and by our commitment to the Five Precepts of Mindfulness, can we begin to reawaken that awareness of our essential unity.

Other Teachers are entitled to their opinions of me…

Traditionally, Tibetan Buddhist practitioners have placed a strong emphasis on the view and instructions passed on through their own lineages, which are crucial to maintaining the authenticity of the teachings. However, many practitioners would spend their entire lives in one monastery and devote much time and effort to a thorough training in one tradition (receiving transmissions, empowerments and instructions), that they would not have time to explore other traditions and approaches. Because of these circumstances, there is a danger that some practitioners are less open to the views and good qualities of other traditions. We see this manifesting in those teachers who condemn what I do as "dressing up in religious costumes", because they are insecure about their own limited spiritual training. What they forget, however, is that our traditions are not of primary importance… only the Truth matters.

At the end of the day, I may be found unworthy to wear the robes of Buddhist, because I refuse to play the sectarian bullshit game. I may be found unworthy of the staff that symbolises my lineage as a successor to the apostles of the Great Rabbi Jesus, because I won’t pretend to believe in an imaginary, vengeful, hatemongering and jealous Divine Imbecile, who’s so freaking insecure that he has to demand that only he be worshipped… or because the Sacred Zombie Tales of the Easter mythos are merely metaphors for me… stories lifted from older traditions for the purpose of illustrating a particular teaching.

And none of that will matter to me.

The Living Dharma Community exists because two or more people choose to interact as an intentional spiritual community of friends. Our focus is on realisation of the Truth that is our "Hidden Nature" — Enlightenment — for the sake of alleviating the suffering of all sentient beings, in countless realms, planes, and aeons.

If what I do pisses off those who are in the religion game… tough shit. I’m far too old to be interested in winning popularity contests on Twitter or Facebook. All I am concerned with is doing whatever I can to alleviate suffering — in myself and others — and inspiring those I touch to do the same.

Nothing more. Nothing less.

If you are in search of a spiritual community where you are respected and accepted for who you are and want the inspiration and support to grow to your highest potential, then the Living Dharma Community may be for you. If you haven’t already done so, come on over to http://livingdharma.spruz.com and check us out. Visit the website for the Contemplative Order of Compassion (http://orderofcompassion.com) for more information on the essential teachings, traditions, projects and path.

But most of all… find peace in every step… stay rooted in the moment… and realise that whatever is not love is fear… and fear will always dissolve the moment we remember the truth of our Being.

You are Love! And you are loved!

Namasté

khenpo gurudas sunyatananda

_____________________________________________

“Chenrezig, Treasure of Objectless Compassion;
Manjushri, Lord of Stainless Wisdom;
Vajrapani, Destroyer of all adversarial forces;
O Je Tsong Khapa – Losang Drakpa —
Crown Jewel of the Sages of the Land of Snows,
Humbly at Your Lotus Feet I ask your blessing.”

_____________________________________________

Drawing on the essential teachings of the great spiritual teachers, philosophers and freethinkers throughout time, Khenpo Gurudas Śunyatananda (retired Archbishop Francis-Maria Salvato, O.C.) has been regarded as a provocative, revolutionary “voice of reason” within the field of religion and spirituality, since 1983. Having the distinction of being one of the few openly non-theistic, openly-gay and post-denominational thinkers ever to serve as Bishop-Exarch and spiritual leader of the autocephalic Eastern Catholic Franciscans in North America, Gurudas is the author of more than 600 articles, eight books and currently serves as the spiritual advisor for a non-theistic, intentional spiritual community, The Spiritus Project. He can be reached at: http://dharmadudeunplugged.com

Copyright ©2010, Khenpo Gurudas Sunyatananda (The Most Reverend Dr. F. Francis-Maria G. Salvato, M.Sc., O.C.). All rights reserved. This material may be reproduced, blogged, quoted or distributed, provided the entire copyright including contact information remain intact. It may NOT be altered in any way, without express written permission.