Friday, December 7, 2018

Christian Koans Part V

Helpful Precedents for reading these Koans are in the following posts.  Steps in Solving KoansOn the Logos: Christian Koans Part IChristian Koans Part II, Christian Koans Part III, and Christian Koans Part IV.  Good luck!


Case 33: “Fr. Mark’s ‘The Logos is easy”


Br. Adam’s Introduction: Jesus accepts all. In that acceptance, past and future yield to now. Hither and thither yield to here. Vice and virtue yield to action. Denying themselves, good and evil men and women become simply “people.” Whether awake or asleep, they live together with him. In accepting all, is Jesus insane? In accepting all, you will know how the old hermit goes this way and that. [bxA]


Main Subject: A novice approached Fr. Mark in the woods. “How much does the Shekinah weigh?Fr. Mark said “Like God’s yoke, the Logos is easy. Remember Rabbouni, to whom the Pharisees brought a woman caught in adultery. He knelt and wrote in the dust.” Fr. Mark bent down, but in his case, he picked up a rock. “Remember his words, ‘let him who is without sin cast the first stone.’” He tossed the stone playfully in the air, and caught it again.

“I’m confused,” said the novice.

Fr. Mark held the rock in front of the novice, and dropped it.

Br. Adam’s Verse:

If we are dust, and returning to dust
where is all that’s written in the dust
when the spirit blows where it wills?

If judgments are rocks,
throwing them at others
or gashing ourselves with them,
we exhaust ourselves.




Case 40: Fr. Mark’s “What were your hearts doing now?”


Br. Adam’s introduction: When the mind hears the words “be still” you will know who God is: just say the words “Not two.” When thoughts about God’s attributes multiply in the mind, just say the words “Not one.” If you fail to say “not two,” what is written will be true of you. “For this people’s heart has grown dull,and their ears are hard of hearing,and they have shut their eyes” If you fail to say “not one” what is written will be true of you as well “So that they might not…turn, and I would heal them.”


Main Subject: One rainy day in September, Fr. Mark was with his novices, landscaping the grounds out by the date palm trees. Though it was late in the season, the trees still bore late-ripening date palms. He saw his novices picking up date palms and eating them. He said “In dualistic systems, God is not the source of the problem, selves are. And again, ears and eyes are not the problem, selves are.”

By the time work ended, since it was raining, his novices were soaked and sweating. One broke the silence to say to another “I hope brother Edward makes mashed potatoes for dinner.” Fr. Mark said “ Be watchful, now…Eyes, ears and heart provide a nourishment in this moment that deprives suffering of its power.”

“What,” they asked “is that, Father?”

Fr. Mark said “Remember the date palms: what were your eyes doing that made you pick them up? What were your hearts doing now that made you think about eating Edward’s mashed potatoes later?”

But the novices did not understand.


Br. Adam’s Verse:

Seeing, hearing, and understanding:
These are all the activities of a person.
They are man, fully alive.
Not so, the activities of selves, not so.
They are like trees planted beside a cesspool.
They are rooted in pollution, and are full of disease.
Rooted in Egoism, we must beware the disease.
A tree is not self-conscious, taking root
To the rain and soil it says ‘not two”
It grows without wanting the sun.

Thursday, November 29, 2018

Christian Koans part IV

Case 41: Fr. Mark's "Different from the 'you' who rises.


Br. Adam’s Introduction: A man who has become Rabbouni’s teaching and example carries a bush, burning and unconsumed, within him. When the Logos is like a burning fire, shut up in his bones, right and wrong are intermingled. When every cell in his body is a snake, lifted on a pole in the wilderness, his hands will feel the cross as fullness for their emptiness, and he will see his teacher face to face.

Main Subject: A novice asked Fr. Mark “St. Paul said ‘I died daily.’ I know all students of Jesus will do the same. I know all activity of the mind will stop. I know, in light of that daily death, that ‘we will not all die, but we will all be changed.’ But if a student dies daily, how will resurrection be?”

Fr. Mark said “The Logos, born in us, is a vision of God. And God said ‘I will be gracious to whom I will be gracious.’ Since it was purely God’s doing, Jesus himself didn’t worry about resurrection. Neither should we. In ways we can’t currently grasp, the “you” who dies will be identical to, yet totally different from the “you” who rises. As to what that looks like, remember the scriptures: “For as the lightning flashes and lights up the sky from one side to the other, so will the Son of Man be in his day.” [bxA]


Br Adam’s Verse:

Fully alive, the glory of God is a continuous death.
One who sees it looks with Christ’s eyes on the world.
To him for whom being is God, God is always present.
To him who speaks in Reality, God is always absent.
But who can differentiate the mind of Christ from their own?
When you remove the log from your own eye,
who, ever after, is the one who blinks?


















Case 42: Fr. Mark’s “Now that you say ‘We are students’”


Br Adam’s Introduction: No one need testify to the man of suffering. He offers his back on account of those who beat him, who hold him of no account. When he offers his cheek to those who pluck the beard, his majesty is non-majesty. When opens his ear to listen as one who is taught, his desire is non-desire. By his stripes, God’s servant justifies many. Many awaken by looking on him whom they have pierced. By his acceptance, he gives those who accept him the power to become children of God. Who is like God, in all the earth? See the following.


Main Subject: Fr. Mark said to his novices “Remember, Jesus said ‘Why do you call me good? No one is good but the Father in Heaven.’ Again he said ‘Call no man on earth your Father, for you have one father in heaven.’ Additionally, you have heard Jesus ask that his followers not be called ‘Rabbi’: ‘for you have one teacher,’ he said ‘and you are all students.’

But I’d go further than that: An eye cannot see itself, and a student learns best who doesn’t realize he’s doing it. Remember Jesus said ‘I came into this world for judgment, so that those who do not see may see, and those who do see may become blind.’ If you were learning, you would not have sin. But now that you say “we are students” your sin remains.”

One of the novices asked “What’s to be done, then?” Fr. Mark replied, “when is the last time you saw a snake?”


Br. Adam’s Verse:
Though the logos speaks in parables and riddles,
It’s not mind that understands the words
And it’s not ears that hear them.
Woe to the mouth through whom they come
He sends out his word and it heals them,
But they say he has Beelzebul.

Thursday, November 22, 2018

Christian Koans Part III


Helpful Precedents for reading these Koans are in the following posts.  Steps in Solving KoansOn the Logos: Christian Koans Part I, Christian Koans Part II.  Good luck!


Case 38: Fr. Mark Extends his finger

Br. Adam’s Introduction: This is not a question of whether, like the virgins (whose lamps either contained oil or lacked it), we ourselves are wise or foolish. Christ comes, (and indeed, he is already here,) whether we are ready to accept him or not. What does readiness look like? See the following.


Main Subject:

Fr. Mark said “Without preparation and context, accepting Rabbouni—who is, himself, the experience of contemplation—this can be too shocking to be constructive. Remember Bartimaeus: He saw Jesus and was glad, but the way he shouted for Jesus tells us why: he’d already accepted he was the “Son of David.” On the other hand, in Bethsaida, when Jesus leads a blind man out of the city, puts saliva on his eyes and lays hands on him, the man only says “I can see people, but they look like trees, walking.” True vision requires Jesus to touch him a second time. [bxA]

Fr. Mark said “Preparation and context can’t force God’s hand, but they can make us ready to accept him when he arrives. This is mainly a process of ego reduction. When the scripture speaks of “uncircumcised ears”, it means that a person hearing with his ego can receive no gospel. Silence deconstructs the ego directly: it is the pierced side of Christ. But sometimes students need a stranger on the road to open the scripture to them, need to feel their hearts burning within them. They need to contend with that part of themselves that won’t believe unless they put their fingers in the wound in his side.”

The Novice said “Why, then, does the scripture not mention Thomas actually putting his fingers in Christ’s side? Christ allowed it, showed his open wound, so why didn’t Thomas touch it?”

Fr. Mark walked over to the novice, looking at him intently. He extended his finger, and touched the novice’s chest. The novice had a sudden realization.


Br. Adam’s Verse:

Acceptance, a radiant seal of the Gospel!
Time is past or present until we accept that it is now.
Even the motionless go hither and yon until
Accepting that “Here” is the only place
Desire, weaned from its objects, is true desire,
And thought, emptied of Self, leads to reality.
If, before retiring for the night,
you want to find the ladder to the heavens,
Clear the ground you sleep on:
The ladder is within you!










Case 39: Fr. Mark’s “What is the field?”


Br. Adam’s introduction: During the Passover, the Lord did not entrust himself to the crowds, because he knew what is in all people. The demon proclaimed him King, and the Lord silenced him. After witnessing his deeds of power, the Lord ordered his disciples to tell no one. When Pilate asked if Jesus was a king, Rabbouni said “You say I am a king.” How will it be for those who live in the Realm of Mystery, and have found total acceptance?


Main Subject:

Sitting among a group of young monks, Fr. Mark said, “Recall the story of the treasure in a field. A man finds a treasure in a field, re-buries it, then sells all he has to buy the field. My question is, what is the field?

A postulant in the back immediately raised his hand, his fingers wiggling. “Is it the monastic life?” he said.

Fr. Mark said “It is as you say it.”


Br. Adam’s Verse:

At an unexpected hour,
When the son of Man comes,
he will find monks praying the hours.
When all meet the Lord in the air,
He will find monks working diligently at their tasks.
At the end of all things,
where is the earth on which
he will he find faith?

Thursday, November 8, 2018

Realm of Mystery, Hill of Calvary:

Ego, the “garment of flesh” in which we return to God, is not to be disparaged too loudly: but its pitfalls are glaring and unavoidable.  Regardless of liabilities, though: both in Catholicism, and in such hindu paths as jnana yoga—thought yoga—it’s possible to elevate the ego until it leads to God, the source of all things.

The post “On Removing Self from Knowing” basically said this: If you know truth with the ego, it will lead you astray. Unless they are grounded in fierce individual ownership of communal deficiencies, even our efforts to proclaim the communally gleaned “truths of the faith” will be treated as credentials or reasons to judge others.

From a certain perspective, both society at large and the Church as a whole have closed their eyes to this. "I think therefore I am,” a highly prized societal maxim, and “It’s right if you think it’s right” the battle cry our relativism—these grow from the same tree: the ego. They both sprout the same fruit: the false self. Even for those claiming to consciously live a spiritual path, interacting with the ego haphazardly commonly leads to mistaking the self for God. Chogyam Trungpa Rinpoche’s “Spiritual Materialism” talks about the harm of turning spiritual goals into playthings for the ego, Under the Influence has spoken of the pitfalls of building an identity based on spiritual consolations and wisdom. Figures as prominent as St. Paul have said that the devil masquerades as an angel of light: in such malevolent hands, sources as pure as God’s law serve to take life as opposed to giving it.

We’ve paid lip service to absolute truth, then built towers to the heavens on the shifting foundation of Ego. The story of the “tower of babel” serves as a warning of the result: such self-sabotage will leave us with wreckage and misunderstanding every time.

And yet there are aspects of the Christian experience, often, at most, merely alluded to, that we’d be well served to take more seriously. Images such as Christ’s descent into hell, Benedict’s ladder of Humility, and Bernard of Clairvaux’s “Steps of Humility and Pride” suggest, as last week’s “Parkway to Paradise, Highway to Hell” post did, that ascending and descending use the same stuff, and happen simultaneously. Those we call great saints often have a degree of awareness of their own sinfulness that would be terrifying if not for God’s mercy, entirely eschewing the popular equation of perfection with faultlessness. Relativism officially feels icky. And yet it’s absolutely true that many of our categories are “relativized.” Behold, a mystery, the depths of which it’s in our best interests to plumb! (Huzzah!)

The question Under the Influence is concerned with today is whether there’s a more reliable way to interact with reality. Not while we’re caught up in ourselves as the “interactor” there’s not, but I get ahead of myself. Taking some catechetical cues from other wisdom traditions, I’ve come to the following conclusion: that something called the “realm of mystery” is an aspect of the present moment. Not only is it a non-egotistical starting point, it’s an ongoing foil to the false certainties of the ego, which ultimately connects us more reliably to Reality, helps us slip the trap of Abstraction, thereby creating silence full of God, Christ, and the Gospel, out of which we can speak if God wills. [bxA]

Before we begin talking about the “Realm of Mystery,” it’s important to make some distinctions. Ongoingly, the God we can describe isn’t God himself: so beliefs, or Articles of Faith like the Trinity, can’t take the place of belief, or trustful self-surrender to the indescribable Godhead. If, for the Word made Flesh, a historical incarnation was neither the beginning nor the end, then we’re bound to speak of the definitive nature, not only of Christ’s historical incarnation, but more fully of his presence in his ultimately-undescribeable mystical body. The highest words about Jesus are not the Eternal Word. The Self we wear around is not the person we are. And the highest of heavens is not a dualistic place: it’s the seat of divinization, a beatitude in which we lose the perception of ourselves as self-conscious or separate from God.

A good architecture for this comes from Meister Ekhart. He spoke of a “threefold birth of the word.” The Word was with God in the beginning. As such the Logos is a silent fourth member of the Trinity, (more a conveyor of divine intelligence than a person outright, mind you) but the tune being played nonetheless while the Godhead dances in a circle. The Word took flesh in the Virgin Mary, and lived a life of self-emptying and service. But the Word, then, takes flesh in us. Under the Influence has said it in the past: Jesus’ entire agenda in appearing as a stranger was to part the Apostles with their historically-rooted paradigm, opening them to the possibility that the strangers they share the road with are the messiah himself. This teaching came to full flower when St. Paul said his true self was “hidden with Christ in God.” Vamping on Catherine of Sienna’s words, (she said “all the way to heaven is heaven”) we might say “all the way to becoming Christ is becoming Christ.”

A wise reader can start to see a skeleton of the “realm of mystery” emerging. The “realm of mystery" is rooted in our present-moment personhood, and that’s important to keep in the forefront. Playing off the German terms for “Ground” (Grund) and “Abyss” (Abgrund), Meister Ekhart spoke of our being as the “Groundless ground” on which God and I behold each other. In a startling degree of agreement with Under the Influence’s “Five Sense Organs of the Body of Christ,” Ekhart says I share an “eye” with God, through which I see him, and he sees me. In the light of that “eye,” and bringing our dualistic God concept as close as it gets to the monistic, there is ultimately no discernible difference between us.

Under the Influence has talked in the past about suspension, the state that cancels opposites: high and low, crucified (in us) with christ, are one in the same. Being better and being worse, when nailed to the cross, yield to simply "being. True and false give up the ghost. Who I am, who I am supposed to be, all I believe about God and Christ and Heaven—all these die together, to be raised however God wills. If suspension’s the Cross, the Realm of Mystery is the place of the skull.

The realm of Mystery can be summed up like this: If suspension unifies opposites, the realm of mystery reveals Christ in paradox. In other words, since Jesus lived, died and rose in paradox, it’s in the lows themselves that we find highs. Our inner selves connect with the outside world because they, like everything, everywhere, obey Christ’s teaching of “interbeing.”

In the Realm of Mystery, we also “will by not willing” and “do by not doing.” Here’s what’s important about that: when our relativist and hedonist voices pipe up with “I say what’s right for me” and “if it feels good, do it” we students of the Way hear, in the words, the ongoingly problematic voices of egotism. A relativist might say “I had to sin to know goodness.” A student of the way would say “I’ve been there. I’m trying, lately, to remember I didn’t have to sin, though I did, in fact, sin a ton, and along the way I learned to avoid sin and embrace goodness without freaking out.” In the realm of mystery, we hope, at most, to transmute our egotistical energy, to use passive volition and be present to reality rather than controlling it. We hope to be so closely united to God that no distinction is found between him and us, his will and ours.

It’s the Realm of Mystery to which the “Aha moment” of finally solving a Koan points. It’s the Realm of mystery that teaches us how realizations, along with conscious use of entheogens and fulfilling desires—all of these things give us breaks from our ego, that’s part of their pull. The work that turns realizations into humility, Samadhi into enlightenment, is to voluntarily lay down the false self of which this life’s various desires, being satisfied, temporarily deprived us.

In short, the solution to false selves isn’t “true selves,” it’s non-self. Our confidence is not in the rectitude of our beliefs about God, but in the “belief" that undergirds it, a much more silent thing. God and Self and Belief are reliable only when they have done what Rabbouni did: died in the place of mystery. Work gets done, words are said, things are desired, but the “I” who’s doing it has changed. Even, if I can state this without any avoidance of responsibility, sins are committed—but in light of God’s mercy they acquire impersonal notes similar to Karma— we part with them as we part with our egos, and not before.

We may die with our boots on, I don’t know. Lord knows which hill I’ll make my last stand on, but if I’ve done it right, my physical death will merely be the final take of the egoic death I’ve run through many times. I could do worse than a realm in which living paradox crucifies every distinction between better and best. I could do worse than forgetting the I who’s expiring till St. Paul’s words “we will not all die, but we will be changed” ring out true and clear. I could do worse than letting the words I speak yield to the Word that can’t be spoken, worse than letting the last trumpet die, till I’m totally comfortable with the nothing that comes, quiet, and after the period.

Thursday, November 1, 2018

Parkway to Paradise, Highway to Hell: in Search of the Gateless Gate

Lately I’ve been hearing quite personally all those reminders that Nirvana and Samsara ("liberation into the goal” and “obsession with the obstacle” respectively)—well, they both exist in the same moment, use the same stuff, occupy the same space. Intellectually, it makes me think Christians need to expand their cosmologies of heaven and hell in similar directions, but I didn’t want to write an intellectually driven post today. Lately, see, I’ve been hearing Ram Dass’ warning with particular force, the one from his book Love Service Devotion about the way we “recreate our own heaven or hell wherever we go—whichever one we’re attached to, anyway.” I’ve been noticing I am so obsessed with the ego, that I can’t connect with egolessness. And lately it’s been getting to me.

In the past, I’ve had several opportunities to encounter what I consider to be “the door to egolessness.” What I mean by this is, I’ll be full of a bunch of mind-moments that seem Very Important, or Very Spiritual. I’ll be, on some level, conscious of the fact that I’m “praying." And in the midst of these mind-moments, “egolessness” will be represented. People say that, if you’re in prayer and you see a door, go through it. If you see a snake, jump into its mouth. Give it a hug. Turn and face it. I come to that wise advice with a history of having misinterpreted the mental phenomena of my spiritual life, though, and it makes it hard to hear. [bxA]

Thus far, every time I’ve been "given a door” in prayer—and this can be as literal as the time I mentally “saw a door” and knew it was “non-self”—I’ve backed away from it. On a dualistic level, where part of the game is evaluating the relative spiritual worth of those phenomena, those doors were either false spiritual phenomena, or the real thing. Failing to go through them is either a genuine missed opportunity, a mistake that will require many more lifetimes of ego-shedding to correct, or it’s spiritually prudent. I don’t know which, though, and I’m slowly learning not to care.

When I was in the monastery, using the different phenomena I experienced in prayer as credentials, I built a narrative that talked about my own spiritual proficiency. I looked down on other people. I paid lip service to needing a redeemer, but balked when he presented himself as a stranger in need. Upon realizing this, I tried to resolve it with a path other than the monastery, failing to see that the problem was the “me” doing the journeying, the degree to which I identified with that “me,” and the system of desires to which that "me" was over-attached.

I’ve been getting pre-occupied lately, and yet I am suspicious of the spiritually obvious. The devil can present himself, and has presented himself, as an angel of light. As the rule of St. Benedict references proverbs 16:25 saying “there are ways that men call right which in the end plunge him into the depths of hell.” I bought both of those T-shirts with great gusto. Were Christ’s second coming to happen, if I were faced with the final, rapturous messiah, I’d probably flee. I’d courteously give my apologies: “Look, man, it’s for your own good. I crucified you the first time around.” The question arises, and it’s valid: is all the work of Under the Influence re-creating
the hell I was in during my time in the monastery, just a hell wearing the saffron robes of a buddhist monk rather than the black and white ones of the Trappists?

If the door to non-self and humility and enlightenment is going to be obvious, I’ll most likely be playing a high stakes game of "Ding Dong Ditch” for the rest of this incarnation. I’ll ring the doorbell atop the stairway to heaven, then hide in the bushes, fearing being found, and costumed in my ego. If the door to humility were obvious, I’d make a great game of spiritual tomfoolery, make it a halloween night full of bag snatching and egging celestial mansions. I’d think myself above dressing up like a princess and begging sweets door to door. I’d be a spiritual curmudgeon, unwilling to wait for the great pumpkin to come like the rest of the losers.

Marshaling as much honest self-appraisal I can muster, I feel I can bank on three things.

For one thing, I need to look critically at chasing insight.  Often, I’ll hear a little voice in my head, one that loops statements like “I've answered a great many koans, with what, if I do say so myself, seems like success.” Even when my seeming “enlightened responses” garner something more than self congratulation, as they sometimes have, they’re perilous. You see, those “Aha” moments (where distance and potential and time all collapse into "here and now" and “doing what I’m doing”) well, those moments are nothing special. And if I treat it as remarkable, I’m going to get caught up in ego and desire again, albeit ego and desire dressed in Guru’s Garments.

For another thing, I need to look critically at interpreting my spiritual practices. To set this up: I “om” on my way back from work. I have an “om” audio track, and I join in, and I work with feelings and sounds. I like spending my commute this way, because the physical isolation of a moving car forces a confrontation with interior motion, helps me to “just drive." Not being able to go anywhere eventually leads me to be right where I am. Also, in a car, I can’t chase after altered states of consciousness. If my Sahasrara Chakra (the “Big" and "Important one," on the top of the head) opens on 355 North, if I go into nirvakalp samadhi, taking leave of my senses and allowing myself to be mentally elsewhere, I’ll cause a 7 car pileup. Death in a twisted ball of flaming metal is reason aplenty to keep my feet nailed to the floor.

Anyway, I om, and if I get caught up in “why I om” or “what om-ing means” I start abstracting, thinking about life instead of living it, building up the “false self” that om-ing was meant to shoot through with the vibration of healing. But letting the sound do the work while I rest in its vibrations implies a fierce relaxation of “myself as the doer." Allowing “om” to be the vehicle of a change wrought by God implies resting at what Under the Influence calls the “First theonoia” of pure perception: it means feeling the sensation and letting it go.

On the Level of Dualism, I still very much need a redeemer. I still need someone to be devoted to. I look at the consistency with which my own spiritual practices have led me to eating Ego and attachment for breakfast, lunch and dinner, and my need for a redeemer who comes to the banquet at midnight and takes things in another direction is obvious. In the meanwhile, the scriptures are fulfilled. I project my egoic woundedness onto other people and God, I blame other people for my problems, and the words of Zechariah 12:10 ring in the ears of my ears "You will look on the one whom you have pierced.” This is profoundly true. I’d like to say I’m hoping that a day will come when the scripture from Isaiah 10:20 is fulfilled that says "You will no longer lean on the one who struck you.” I’d like a day to come when I’m done with ego. But in any given moment, I’m apt to have my eyes closed to the ways I’m confusing hope (which is delight in what God provides) with expectation (egotistically setting up a paradigm in my head which will net disappointment if it doesn’t happen.) If I’m doing that, then "not giving me what I hope for" is just of God, and somewhat begrudgingly much-appreciated.

On a level of monism, I know I have work to do internalizing the messiah. The Apostles had to do it with Jesus after his death, and he trained them in that way. First he died, then he rose, appearing to them first in a form they recognized, then in the form of strangers-revealed-as-Christ. Eventually the apostles were doing less internal gymnastics to reach the conclusion that the person in front of them was Christ. By the time Christianity gets to the apostle Paul, our True Selves are “hidden with Christ in God” and by the time it gets to Therese of Lisieux, we’re told “Christ has no body now but yours.” These are text-book patterns, common in Bhakti, or Devotional Yoga, and precisely identical to, say, the movements of “Guru Kripa” or the internalization of the guru in Hinduism. With my own rabbi, I have that work to do. I may eventually realize that everyone, including myself, is the messiah.
But all that is analysis. And if the spiritual game is like monopoly, analysis is a chance card that either gives you a sudden windfall or sends you to jail, directly to jail, without passing go, without collecting two hundred dollars.

It seems, finally, that there is another way, and it seems to be the way that, for me, gets the job done. If I find myself anxious about anything—God and spirituality included, because neurosis will use anything it can to snag a fella-- I concentrate on listening actively. Eventually I calm down. If I’m caught up in “Trying to listen,” I om.  Concentrating on the feelings associated with producing the sound backs my attention off from what Under the Influence called "active volition," puts me in a space of "Passive volition," or presence to reality. Eventually, I calm down. And if I find myself obsessing about om-ing, I have a beer, do the dishes and watch junk television with my Jackie: the kind my fiancee can admit she likes, the kind I can only admit I like to make fun of.  The point is, only clear-minded acceptance of reality, not thinking about God, is the ultimate expression of union with God.

This “Other Way” is to simply practice without getting freaked about it. It’s to balance the importance of the present moment with the infinite mercy of God, and the real possibility that I’ve been doing this for thousands of lifetimes, and will do it for thousands of lifetimes, until the Christ who is simultaneously my true self and "time itself" decides he can take off every last bit of “Me” costume, give away all his candy, turn on spooky music and dance around his lit jack-o-lantern in the dark.

Because the answer to the question above, “am i recreating my own hell” is “Yes." Verily: one hundred percent indubitably, and stuff. Am I getting closer to enlightenment? Well, not while there’s a “me” writing a blog about it, I’m not—and at other times, it’s a solid maybe.

But also, who cares? I do, I suppose, and I will, until the rock-hard “I” who thinks it’s doing the caring gets ground into the sands of time, only to find compassion and God and and enlightenment singing “all we are is dust in the wind." And the words will ring out, the trumpet will sound: certainly the dead will be raised imperishable. Even if the debate about resurrection versus reincarnation endures for many lifetimes, if a trumpet blows, but I have ceased to identify with the ear that hears it, does it make a sound? In the face of the question, we might give up, call both sides right. And in that "then" (which is also "now") I will see no door, just a there that's here, and wide as openness.

Thursday, October 18, 2018

The Gospel as Tao: Acceptance as Pu, and Apostles of Now

Under the Influence has long taught that “logos” is the equivalent of the chinese character “mu.” In other words, Logos is paradox, purposefully maintained so as to break our addiction to logic and awaken intuition.

This asks an important question, though. If Logos is paradox—the unresolved tension between speaking and silence—then what is the gospel, and how do we proclaim it?

The post New Thoughts on Evangelization has reminded us of the Church’s ground rules: The gospel is lived first, then preached verbally only when someone asks. Some religious communities go even further than that: the little brothers and little sisters of St. Charles de Foucault purposefully take menial jobs, and may not even tell you about Jesus when you ask.

The point, as the post said, is that "life itself preaches.” This has been a belief in the background of Under the Influence for as long as it’s existed. So I’m sort of surprised that the following statements have taken this long to formulate. The day they occurred to me, I wrote them in BIG LETTERS across my mind: THE GOSPEL IS PU. WHEN IT’S PROCLAIMED, IT’S THE TAO. [bxA]

The Tao Te Ching was written by Lao Tzu, who might have been a composite of three people, the most notable of whom might have been a 4th Century record keeper in the Chinese province of Chou. As is supported by the Tao’s focus on good governance, Chou might have been disintegrating politically. The story goes that Lao Tzu wrote the Tao in lieu of paying a tax to cross a bridge at the province’s border.

The combination of Taoist and Buddhist philosophies is what gave the world Zen Buddhism. Zen has a focus on “trying not to try,” which comes directly from the Taoist concept “wei wu wei” or “doing not doing.” The emphasis in wei wu wei is egolessness, not sedentary living. In describing wei wu wei, Taoist scholars often use the analogy of the athelete who’s so proficient that his ego drops away in mid-high jump. Under the Influence, in “Biff, Kapow, Thwap: A Study in Contemplative Attention” spoke of “passive volition.” This “being present to reality without ego" is an absolute correlation to wei wu wei.

Proclamation of the gospel is the Tao. My old mentor Chrysogonus fascinated me by telling me that, when the Gospel was translated into Chinese, “the Way”—the name for early Christianity—was translated as “Tao” and Christians were called “followers of the Tao.” It blew my little twelve year old mind.

What the Gospel proclaims is Pu, is reality, is the body of Christ. When a Christian says “Here I am” he is in harmony with how things are. His perfect acceptance would be acceptance of that thing Taoism calls “Pu.” Pu is the uncarved block. It is “things as they are.” Loss of life, loss of all feelings of communion with the Father, the feeling of his nails in his hands—all these things were ok, ultimately, because they were reality. Incarnations are dualist, so for a minute let’s be dualist and remember that reality is one of the Five Sense Organs of the Body of Christ mentioned in the Under the Influence post a couple weeks ago. It’s one of the ways God perceives us, and we, him. All that a Christian is saying is Pu, it's “how things are,” and how things are” is all a Christian is saying.

A few weeks ago, Under the Influence claimed that the first of four humble truths of Christianity is “All life is abstraction.” Even further back, Under the Influence improvised around Zen categories and outlined what happens in cognition during Contemplation and Obedience: in short, a still mind was said to be remaining at the “first theonoia” or "God thought.” A mind imposing separate labels like “Self” and “God" was at the second, and a mind weaving theories and philosophies was at the third. Under the Influence’s claim was that “Remaining in Jesus” was a matter of stilling the mind till it rests in the first theonoia. Under the Influence further said that the abstraction of the second theonoia was what made God give us “garments of flesh”—first egos, then physical incarnations. The posts took pains to remember that, with all their potential for harm, egos and bodies were a mercy: tools to return to resting in God.

The Gospel, proclaimed, is the Tao. Taking catechetical cues from Buddhism, Under the Influence suggested that “Acceptance” was the 3rd Gospel Seal—the third thing that all Christian teaching must agree with to be Christian. In the background of that post were the voices of realized beings like Maharaja-ji who turned to Ram Dass one day, remarking on the evil in the world, and said “can’t you see it’s all perfect?” Jesus was the ultimate tantric teacher. He could take the energy even of suffering and transmute it into energy of life.

Of course, we should get nitty gritty here for a minute and tackle some ways that seems not to be true. Jesus healed the sick. Wasn’t that changing “the way things are?” Jesus accepted death at the hands of his oppressors. Shouldn’t oppressed people accept their oppression and death as “the way things are?”

Hang on, because blindness is part of a larger game, and (to counter Chicago’s Chance the Rapper) Jesus’ Black Life did, in fact, matter. Jesus healed the “Man Born Blind” because it was part of that man’s purgatorial predicament to be one of those healed by Jesus, to show forth God’s power. (To digress, Ram Dass and others theorize this is one of the places in the new testament that the early Judeo Christian belief in reincarnation is in the background. When Jesus’ disciples ask “who sinned, this man or his parents, that he should have been born blind?” they’re presupposing a previous life in which the man’s purgatorial predicament could have set up “blindness as part of the next round’s purgative dance.”)

When oppressors tell the oppressed they should accept their mistreatment, it’s the second theonoia wielding its warped ego action. Jesus’ death and resurrection was completely and totally possible because he remained egoless. To be nailed on the cross was to remain at the first theonioia: he experienced his suffering willingly as suffering and it became part of his transformation. He experienced thirst as thirst and it became part of his transformation. For oppressed communities, the gospel move is to do what Shaolin Monks do in Kung Fu, what Gandhi-ji did in India: to sidestep the oppressor’s energy, continuing it on its way, and to accept and televise the oppressors denied violence until sheer dint of truth forces him to face it.

For a long time now, regardless of anything linguists would tell you, when Under the Influence said “Logos” it meant “paradox, mu.” Now, when Under the Influence says “Gospel” it means “Pu.” When Under the Influence says “Evangelization” it means “Tao.” I don’t mean to theologically equivocate here, merely to recognize in the words “Logos,” “Gospel,” and “Evangelization” the same functions as Mu (with its paradox), Pu (with its immanent perfection) and Tao (with its "speaking to what is”).

When a Christian says “Here I am” he’s proclaiming that “Here everything else is” he’s recognizing things as they are. It’s the prayer of the man who goes before God, simply as himself, whose only words are those of total acceptance. Most of us think we have to get our ducks in a row before going to God. The student of the Way has the simplest words on his lips. They’re the inner meaning of any prayer spoken from an egoless space: to wit, "This is what I’ve got.” Whatever comes out of our mouths, may it forever be saying just that.

Thursday, October 11, 2018

Family, Faith and Foundations: Part 2 of 2

IV.

Gramps was buried in Westford, and Granny died in Atlanta. So transporting her ashes would be challenging. Human remains were hell to send through the mail.

Since I’d driven down from North Carolina, I was the only person in Atlanta who absolutely had to drive to the funeral. Everyone else had the option to fly. So it was ultimately decided that I would road trip the ashes back home to Vermont. The family even paid for new tires for my car, taking the money out of Granny’s estate.

My family called it the “Highway to Heaven” tour. They were playing on the 1980 TV show by the same name, in which Micheal Landon played an angel. Privately there were jokes about me befriending overweight truckers along the way, and snapping photos with both them and my Grandmother’s urn of cremains. Publicly, as always, we Warners were less cheeky.

I left the next day. I don’t remember a single moment of the trip, until I crossed the Vermont state border. Then I remember almost every second of it. I remember the feel of the wind as I drove. I remember the look of the trees, which seemed poised, despite the warmth, to begin changing color and dropping their leaves. [bxA]

In the town next to Westford, there’s a funeral home run by the Minors, an old Westford family. Stephen Minor, the owner, met me when I arrived. The Minors and the Warners were never terribly close, but I remember a story about the older siblings of the two families: they used to play tetherball together. Steve Minor had a dog named Penny, and she, too, did her part in the tetherball games. She would jump up and bite the tetherball as it passed, then hang on and sail around in a circle. This provided no end of enjoyment for those involved.

Steve Minor had a kind face, and a warm smile. Just knowing this small story made me feel as if I was arranging a reunion of Westford’s old guard. “Is this Irene?” he asked, as I handed him the box containing her urn. I nodded, and he took it gently, saying “We’ll take good care of her.” And I believed him.

I got back in the car. I had other stops to make.

I remember what it felt like to drive past the covered bridge. This town was home, although I’d never lived here. I drove to the corner on which the General Store stood.

The General Store was run by Kevin and Suzie Kerns. Back when Suzie Kerns was Suzie Poulliot, she used to babysit my father and his siblings, literally going along on family vacations to help with the care of all 10 Warner kids.

I didn’t know this at the time, and Kevin and Suzie have the reserve typical of New Englanders. So we didn’t exchange many words. I bought a swisher sweet cigar and a Diet Coke. After my Aunt Kim arrived, she made sure to stop in and see the Kerns. From her I’d eventually learn that, as I was walking up to the store, Kevin turned to Suzie and said, “Well, I know he’s a Warner. I just don’t know who he belongs to.”

That was the first time in my adult life that I’d been recognized, by a stranger, as a member of my father’s family. To come back to the seat of the entire family narrative, and be recognized, on sight, as a part of it, affected me profoundly.

That was, of course, after reflection. For the moment I was standing there in the Westford General Store with relative strangers. I paid for the swisher and the soda, and set my sights to where my grandfather was buried 13 years before. I didn’t go to the funeral, and had never seen his gravestone. As his wife was about to be buried by his side, I thought, it was high time to do so.

Graveside, I did three things. For Granny, I prayed a rosary. The family had given me the beads she died holding, and those were the beads I used that day. For Gramps, I lit up the swisher, blowing the smoke on his grave because I figured he missed the smell. For me, as I’d been driving most of the day, I downed the diet coke in record time, grateful to feel a bit more awake. One of the old women of Westford stopped by to express condolences as I was standing there, making clear the town’s awareness of the passing of one of their own.

The days leading up to the funeral were full of reunions. My Pop and his siblings began to trickle in, and stories long relegated to memory came out of their mouths, easy as exhalation. The townswomen put on a covered dish supper and everyone came. I met the Larsons of my generation who were still in town, and noticed that one of my grandfather’s paintings still hung on the walls of the Red Brick Church, long ago converted to a meeting hall.

My last act as transporter of Granny’s ashes was to bear the urn down the main aisle at the start of her funeral. To this day I am proud to have seen that task through to its end.

Funerals are heavy anyway, but I felt again the need to lighten up as the funeral progressed. Earlier on I’d returned to Kevin and Suzie’s, and bought a new pack of Swishers. I had them in my pocket at the funeral. As Granny’s ashes were being interred, I passed the pack around on the sly to uncles and aunts, all of whom recognized Gramp’s brand and drew out a stogie with a smile.

I fished through my pocket for my lighter, and had it in my hand as I made the final Sign of the Cross. Before long, Aunts, Uncles and Cousins were all incensing the graves with a scent that forever held Gramp’s memory.

What I didn’t know is, as I was road-tripping with Granny’s ashes, my Aunt Kim was getting in touch with the family who lived in the old Warner homestead. They were generous enough to invite every one of us, with apologies for the mess, to come by after the internment.

So, with the stubs of Swisher Sweets in many of our mouths still, we travelled to the house. They’d cut down the Crab Apple tree that whomever was sleeping in the second floor bedroom could use to sneak out of the house. And they’d filled in the swimming pool into which my uncles and aunts used to jump from the first floor roof that extended over the deck. So the house had lost some of its capacity to incite mischief. But even as I walked through the kitchen, I knew that all of the pipes had been laid by my grandfather. In the corner of the living room, at one point, the family had kept a television. Its life was cut short the day my Pop came into the room screaming “CAPTAIN KANGAROO” as the program was starting. He felt, for some reason, compelled to deliver a high karate kick to the air, after which gesture his shoe came off, flying into the television and breaking it. Suffice to say, the family’s past was everywhere.

After the funeral, the family dispersed. I drove back to South Bend long enough to do laundry, en route back to Mepkin for a longer stay. After my encounter with Westford, South Bend, and indeed every town I drove into, was different. After that trip I knew where I’d come from. I’d helped my Granny come to rest. And, more than I had before the journey, I knew who I was. I was a Warner. I’d been the courier. And I would become, in my own way, a custodian of the fragment of family story that I’d learned over those days.



V.

I returned to the Monastery with grieving to do. At this point I was what they called an observer: someone who has declared an interest in joining the community. As such, I’d been assigned a director, a priest named Fr. Feliciano. Monasteries are tremendous at helping people to mourn, for those willing to see that there’s grieving to. The routine, and its monotony, simultaneously supports the one living it and leaves no distraction between a man and his emotions. The monks used to say “In a monastery, if you’re struggling, you can get through it by simply living the routine.” I found this to be true, but I also found living it richer and harder to bear than I’d anticipated.

It’s said that two of Jesus’ disciples, after his death, initially fled Jerusalem in despair. They came upon, and began travelling with, a stranger, to whom they revealed their disappointment that Jesus had not risen as he said he would. As they walked toward the town of Emmaus, their conversation wandered onto interpretation of the Torah, and the stranger’s comments were insightful enough to impress the disciples. Later, as the three dined, the stranger blessed the bread and broke it. The gesture so poignantly brought back the memory of their deceased Rabbi that the disciples literally felt the stranger to be Jesus himself. So they began to proclaim him risen all over Galilee.

I’ve said before that Granny and Gramps were the key to my faith being more than pie-in-the-sky stories. In fact, I think the story of Emmaus is literally true, and I think that because something similar happened to me.

In the monastery, grief took up temporary but real residence in the center of my chest. I was constantly tense, for reasons it took years to attribute to grieving, but reasons which were a mystery at the time.

I talked about this with a few monks. For one, I spoke about it with Br, Vincent, one of Mepkin’s blessed eccentrics who would become, by and by, one of my closest friends there. I told him the story of Granny’s Westford funeral, of incensing the graves with the smoke of Swisher Sweet Cigars.

“Oh hey,” Vince said “I should have guessed that a man as classy as your grandfather would smoke cigars. Come with me.”

I followed Vince. He guided me to his room, a cluttered thing with every inch of wall space covered in posters, some of which were homemade. He fished around in his desk drawer and produced a swisher sweet cigar. He said “Next Sunday, I want you to take a stroll around the farm. Smoke this cigar, and remember your Grandparents.”

I was stymied. “Vin,” I said, “How is it that you even have this?” Shouldn’t these be impossible to get in here?”

Vincent grinned “I suppose they should be hard to get, but they’re not. Often the monks have friends who bring them gifts when they come to visit. If you went through the rooms of some of us old guys you’d find many of them have whole drawers full of cookies. Some of the monks keep back a little bit of ‘unaccounted-for’ money, so as to go out for cheeseburgers when they’re out at the dentist without turning in a receipt for it and tipping off the powers that be. It can have its pitfalls…Mepkin’s black market could be a way for, say, an alcoholic monk to get his hands on a bottle. That’s happened in a couple of cases at some of the other Trappist houses. But usually its more innocent than that. So everyone knows it goes on, and everyone looks the other way.”

Mepkin Abbey, then, that vanguard of holiness, had a black market. This knowledge was delicious to me, but it aggravated my bad case of the scruples as well. Being in possession of contraband was something that my neophyte conscience couldn’t bear to keep from my director, so when I next met with Fr. Feliciano, I told him I had it. I was lucky on two counts. For one thing, he didn’t ask me to reveal my source. Additionally, he didn’t ask me to surrender it. The whole thing seemed entirely unsurprising to him.

“You should smoke it slowly.” Fr. Feliciano said. “Be deliberate, and make it a prayer.”

So it happened that I partook of a contraband swisher. On this walk I admitted to myself that throughout the funeral, I’d held myself together, at least in part, by force. I’d gotten through Granny’s death on a mix of caffeine and adrenaline. Given the energy denial takes, merely admitting this relaxed me. This presaged my realizing that the cycle of overwork and burnout could eclipsed generosity for me, but it would be years before that concretized.

Out of the blue, on that walk, I found myself talking: to no one, at first. And the words were all about exhaustion. Then I heard myself address him:


“Gramps,” I said, “I don’t know where to go. I don’t know how to balance all the things I need to balance. I don’t know how to be generous. And I don’t know who I am, or how to live my life well. Please help me. Please help.”

The words rolled out calmly, when they came. And it may be that Gramps really wasn’t there. He didn’t appear to me. But neither had the words been there, the ones I really needed to say, until I said them to him. That prayer, I decided, was proof of his intercession.

I need to diverge a bit and describe something about Granny, because it’s important to understanding the conclusion of this story. Granny had a particular smile, and something she’d say when she was trying to express astonishment. The smile had notes of feigned haughtiness in it: she’d move her head back over her shoulders and stick out her chest a bit. And she always said the same words: “How ‘bout that?”

I say this because later, I narrated the whole stogie walk for Fr. Feliciano. I ended saying “So, in the end, I feel a lot better, thanks a lot.”

“Ah,” he said, “God works in mysterious ways. How ‘bout that?”

Something happened at this point, something difficult to explain. When Feliciano said “how ‘bout that?” he squared his head over his shoulders and stuck out his chest a bit. And when he spoke the words, I was suddenly aware that I was not looking at Feliciano anymore. I was looking at Granny. I suppose I didn’t see her the way my Uncle David saw Gramps. But I was as certain of her presence as I was of my own. If it is possible to see with something other than my eyes, in that moment I most certainly saw Granny. At that point, the immediate grief of Granny’s death was easier to bear.

At one point in the Gospels, Jesus reveals to an adulterous woman that he knows about her 5 husbands, that nothing she’s done shocks him and that he won’t reject her for her choices.

The woman goes to a neighboring town and relates the incident to the people. They invite Jesus to remain with them for a few days, and by the end of their time with him, they say, “We no longer believe because we were told. We have seen and believe that you are the Messiah.”

I no longer believe because I was told. I believe because I have seen. I believe because an old, stogie chomping construction worker started making house calls when his kids needed it. I believe because, even as I am writing this, he is helping me find the words. I believe because his wife was a gentle, story-rich presence and still is.

Gramps created a family symbol, one he made into medals. When he married Granny he gave her a medal, and when she died the medals were given to the grandkids. I never took mine off. The medal’s hole was only large enough for a thin chain, though, and those broke, so I lost my family medal. This was towards the end of my monastic life, during the period when my relationship with the monastery was shifting. I briefly discussed it with the abbot. Perhaps he saw my departure from the monastery as the writing on the wall, because I made a suggestion, and for whatever reason, he gave his blessing.

In any case, some months later I went into town for a doctor’s appointment, and stopped by a tattoo parlor to have the family symbol tattooed on my right forearm.

In the Jewish confession of faith, it says “take to heart these words which I enjoin on you today. Drill them into your children. Speak of them at home and abroad, whether you are busy or at rest. Bind them as a frontlet on your forehead, as a symbol on your arm.”

And again, saint John Chrysostom said something like “Those whom we have loved and lost are no longer where they were. They are now where we need them to be.” When Granny sent that poem she found in my grandfather’s wallet, the one written by my father, her accompanying note asked me to “Remember those who went before [me], and what they gave of themselves.” All of the words, all of the stories, and the evolving sense of who I am, they’re now a part of my embrace. Like those in the stories, by now the words are where I need them to be. Here, now. And by and by, God willing, fully told.




Thursday, October 4, 2018

Family, Faith and Foundations: Part 1 of 2

This is an excerpt from a book I wrote mining my reasons for entering and leaving the monastery.  The following is the first part of one of its Chapters.  The second part will follow next week. 

                                                                *******************

My first car was a 1997 Mercury Mystique. I received it from a retired social worker named Irene Mary Warner, a woman past her driving years, known to her former colleagues as “the Bulldog.” I knew her simply as “Granny.”

Granny raised 10 kids in the small town of Westford Vermont with her husband Walter Warner Senior, himself a contractor by day and a painter by night. 

I need to talk about these two because they’re the reason I have any faith at all. They are the entire reason I know the things of God to be something more than bullshit myths. In many ways, they are the entire reason for this book. 

I.) 

Westford, Vermont is to my family what Jerusalem is to Jews, or Mecca to Muslims. Like other New England towns, Westford’s buildings are gathered around a town common, a large swath of lawn that used to be a field of overgrown grass. And tucked between the houses, my family’s stories have permanent place, as important to the landscape as the Brown’s River at the edge of town, or the covered bridge that, to this day, stretches over it. 

I could tell you about the time my Aunt Noreen strung toilet paper across that covered bridge, causing a car and the boat it was pulling to jack-knife. I could tell you that my Uncle Walt (Walter Junior, the second of three Walters in the family) took the blame for it, and how the truth only came out when Granny was on her deathbed. I could tell you that Walter Warner Senior eventually spearheaded the preservation of that bridge when the roads into town were widened. All of these things are part of the story of Westford, as apparent to me as I drive into the town as Vermont’s Autumn colors. 
It is more important to the story, though, that you know about the family. Granny and Gramps had 10 children: 7 biological, 3 adopted. My father, Steve, was the oldest of the biological children, a group that included my uncles Tim, Brian, David and Walt. My Aunts are Noreen and Karen. After this my grandparents adopted 3 more: my Aunt Kim, from Korea, my Aunt, Nanakoo, saved off the streets of Calcutta by Mother Teresa, and my Uncle Tom, who became permanently estranged from the entire family long before I was born. 

My grandparents would always fill two carts when grocery shopping, and would purchase entire cows at the butcher, only clarifying how said cow was to be carved up. Despite the many mouths to feed, my grandparents always kept space at the table for the many friends my father’s generation brought home. So I grew up knowing many members of that Westford town as a part of the family. 

Particular mention should be made, here, of the Larsons. It was Patty Larson that helped my Aunt Noreen with the stringing of toilet paper. When my grandmother lay dying, Juli Larson travelled to be with us. To me, she’s always been “Ms Juli” as opposed to Aunt Juli. But Mrs. Larson died young, and Ms. Juli found mother figures where she could. So when she entered my grandmother’s hospital room, she took her hand and said “Hi Mom” and Granny recognized her voice, opened her eyes and addressed her by name. Grandkids in the Larson clan recognize my grandmother (calling her “Grandma Warner”) in old family pictures. The closer one is to Westford Vermont, the more negligible the differences between Warners and Larsons. 

The family’s church was St. Luke’s, a white wooden building in the neighboring town of Fairfax that was subsequently converted to a convenience store. After granny died, I stopped in for history’s sake while driving granny’s ashes back to Westford. I had a naughty chuckle or two imagining my family worshipping there, saying things like “Our pew was back by the freezer section.”


II.

To talk about Granny’s death too soon would be to get ahead of the story. I need to talk first about Gramps’ death. He died suddenly in 1991, when I was 12. He’d had a massive stroke in the lobby of the doctor’s office. The news shook my family. The Patriarch, who came to the table shirtless and ate his steaks rare, who managed the construction of headquarters for a generation of Westford businesses, and who painted from his heart, would never roof another house. In life, he’d smoked swisher sweet cigars and he drank just a little too much. 

Gramps was nothing if not honest. In the course of a single Scrabble game, he would cheat (passing his tiles off as blanks by placing them upside-down,) then be unable to bear it and turn himself in. But for years, and more with notes of sadness than anger, all I could remember was that he’d promised to take me fishing, and died before he kept the promise. I am not sure I would even enjoy fishing…but I would go, were it with him. The suddenness of the death struck Granny hardest. She always said, when she saw him again, that she’d scold him for leaving so abruptly. 

Among his possessions, at the end, was a poem my father had written when he was seventeen. Gramps had it in his wallet on the day he died. Granny, knowing my tendencies to wordsmithing, sent it to me. To this day, it’s one of my prized possessions. 

My Gramps, to me, isn’t just among those I count as “beloved dead.” He is the reason I believe in heaven. And I believe this because Gramps came from beyond the grave, saved the life of one of his kids, and reached out to another who needed him. 

My Uncle David used to work in airplane maintenance. The particular plane he worked on was the F16, a plane about which I know next to nothing. And most of the details don’t matter, except to say that F16’s carry bombs. 

On the day when a bomb dropped from the F16 Uncle David was working on, my grandfather was the only reason he was far enough away from the plane to survive. 

Imagine a clock face. On that day, the plane was at my Uncle David’s 12. His tool box was at about 4 o’clock. As the story was told to me, right before the bomb dropped, my uncle was getting a tool, and saw my grandfather standing at his 6. Only when Uncle David had turned completely around and taken several large steps away from the plane did the bomb drop and explode. The experts who studied the accident said his distance from the plane was key to his survival. And his father had drawn him away from the plane. 

I have asked Uncle David about this incident too many times. Once at a family reunion I cornered him with my most burning question. 

“Uncle David” I asked “What do you mean when you say you ‘saw gramps?’” 

He replied “I saw him like I see you.” 

For the sake of the story, I’ll make bold and call this the “Family Miracle.” I suppose I could disregard it as an isolated incident, if similar unlikely events hadn’t happened to other family members. 

For several years, due to problems of addiction, my Aunt Nanakoo was estranged from the family. This was the case in 1991 when gramps died, and so there was no way to find Aunt Nanakoo to tell her that her father had died. After a while, Aunt Nanakoo beat her addictions cold turkey, and my grandmother independently felt the urge to find her daughter. Ever the social worker, my granny used all the skills she had, and found Nanakoo living in Florida, clean and in a stable relationship. Granny made plans to visit. 

When the day of their meeting came, Granny opened with the news that Gramps had died. To Granny’s surprise, Nanakoo already knew. And she hadn’t learned it from a newspaper. She’d fallen asleep in the car one day while Larry, just shy, at the time, of being her husband, was in the supermarket. Gramps had appeared to Aunt Nanakoo in a dream. He’d made it clear that he’d died, that he was with her and that he loved her. She treated those things, upon waking, like the facts they were. 

In one sense, these stories amount to little more than family lore. But when I first heard them, they became the foundation for important reasoning. If Gramps appeared from beyond the grave, I thought, he must have come from somewhere. And if Gramps was the only reason Uncle David was alive, he must be able to answer my prayers as well. So I no longer doubted not only the existence of heaven, and thenceforth believed in the Saints’ intercession. Because, after all, my grandfather was no saint, and without his appearance two members of my family would have followed drastically different paths. A bona fide Saint, I figured, could do at least as much. 

And lets face it, sometimes God is hard to talk to. He’s too big and invisible to avoid this particular pitfall of omnipotence. Shortly after that, whenever I couldn’t talk to God, I started talking to Gramps. I never needed him to appear in my life. I just needed him to listen. It’s a post that he and Granny would come to share.




III.

For a brief stint before entering Mepkin, I had worked as a youth minister in Greensboro, North Carolina. This staging point was most of the reason why I ended up at joining Mepkin. The first monastery a Google search turned up was Mepkin, and for a time, in my life, I saw that as divine providence. So proximity to North Carolina isn’t just why I joined Mepkin, it the reason that, when I would travel from my home in Indiana to the monastery, I would stop off in Greensboro and stay with friends.

I’ve said before that my stays in the monastery grew progressively longer: first a week, as a retreatant, then a month, as a monastic guest, and then three, having made my interest in joining the community known. All of these happened before entering the monastery outright, for what I expected would be forever.

After my month long stint at the monastery, I had just arrived in Greensboro, en-route homeward to South Bend, when I got a phone call from my father. Come to Atlanta, he said: end stage COPD was claiming my grandmother’s life.

Granny moved to Georgia to be close to my Aunts Kim and Karen. Atlanta is a mere six hour drive from Greensboro; while I resided in North Carolina I made it a point to visit her regularly.

Our times together were story times. Granny was not suffering from any form of dementia, but her stories recurred from one visit to the next; I suppose she just knew which stories to entrust to which people, and kept doing it till they stuck.

Granny always referred to Gramps as her “fella.” From the day they married, hard though the commitment was, at times, she never backed down from her love for him. I reckon he should have felt fairly special. You see, Granny’d had a proposal of marriage before meeting Gramps.

He’s known to our family simply as “the tennis player.” Till the day she died, my Granny always remembered two things about the tennis player, without fail: that he was tremendously handsome, and that he used to annoy my grandmother to no end by closing their dates with a singing of “Goodnight Irene.” Granny hated that song. It’s appropriate that, the tennis player’s sport of choice, scorelessness is referred to as “Love:” belting out the ditty that contained her name earned the poor man zero points. I don’t remember a time the song was mentioned in her presence when Granny didn’t visibly cringe.

Ultimately the tennis player became presumptuous, asking my grandmother to type his term papers while he went out drinking. Things like this became a pattern and a warning sign to Granny, and she broke off their engagement.

All of this was water under the bridge, of course, when she met Gramps. He cared for his family immensely. Granny was not surprised to hear that he’d appeared from beyond the grave to Aunt Nanakoo and Uncle David. She had only one enduring objection. She used to smile at us and say “If your Grampy’s making house calls, I wish he’d remember he was married.”

Granny was no stranger to religion. At one point, she had considered converting to Judaism. She always wanted to get at things by their roots, and religion was no different. In the end, she found belief in Jesus to be something she couldn’t abandon. She didn’t shirk religion’s demands, either: it was no small task that she’d guided 10 kids through catechism, even at one point switched churches, citing the priest’s failure to involve lay people in running the parish.

So Granny was unsurprised when I told her about my desire to enter the monastery. She had a way of summing up her feelings in pithy euphemisms, a tendency of which her reaction to me was fine example. She simply said “Well, you’ve picked a hard row to hoe, but you’ve gotta follow your heart. Otherwise, when you look back on your life, all you see is what Paddy shot at and missed.”

On that final trip to Atlanta, I arrived just as Granny was moving from her permanent apartment to her hospice room. What struck me most was her pill case. Granny took a massive number of pills daily, and when she left it behind it was a clear symbol of her willingness to die when it was her time to do so. As they wheeled her out of the room, she saw me eye the pill case. Apparently I looked concerned, because she put her left hand on my arm. With her right she removed the nebulizer mask she was wearing (this was the last time she’d use it.) She looked at the pills, then at me. She smiled and winked, “How ‘bout that? Don’t you worry about me. I’ll be good tomorrow. Today’s high risk.”

When she was fully transitioned to her hospice room, I did notice she’d taken a rosary with her. Over the next four days or so, since I’d just come from a monastery, the family would ask me to lead a rosary several times. I would lay my head against her arm as Granny and I wove through the alternating Our Fathers and Hail Marys. Granny would sometimes reach over with her free hand and stroke my head. She knew, I think, that leading a rosary for the whole family was a heavy responsibility. Not everyone in the family was still Catholic. Some of them had left the church altogether, some had converted to more conservative Christian religions. This phenomenon was Granny’s reason for the name she gave her family. She called us “her motely crew.”

When someone I love is in hospice care, everything stops; their care becomes something for which I drop everything. This would come to serve me well in the monastery, and I would help seven monks through their last days.

In Granny’s case it was a reason to be totally present to her. Over the next four days, each family member had a moment being close to Granny. There were nightlong vigils that consisted of simply listening to granny breathe. Something occurred to me that never had before, and it would come back to me over the many years at Mepkin, working in palliative care. Granny was choosing to take each breath. And during the moments when she’d fall out of lucidity, we all knew she was in intense negotiations with her maker.

It’s said that a person who’s still breathing but not lucid can still hear what’s going on around them. Granny was totally aware of which children were driving to see her. Uncle David and his wife Jeanette were the last to arrive. I am convinced Granny knew they were coming.

She died about an hour later. It happened like this: Aunt Kim leaned in to whisper in her ear. She said “After your funeral, we’re gonna go back to the house in Westford, thank the people who’ve watched it for us since we moved out, but tell them their services are no longer required, and that they can move out now.”

Granny hadn’t been lucid for hours. But when Aunt Kim said what she said, the corners of Granny’s mouth bent up in a smile, then she exhaled a last puffed breath, and died.

Many of us cried when granny passed, but after 4 days of grieving, my entire family was exhausted. We needed what most people need after a catharsis: beer. In relative, tired silence we filed back into cars and ended up crammed, all of us, into my aunt Karen’s kitchen. By and by everyone had a full glass, and we all stood waiting for someone to know what to say.

In a moment of inspiration, I raised my glass into the cloud of silence that hung over the room. I looked around at my family and said “Goodnight, Irene.”

Everyone knew the story. Everyone laughed. I think even the tennis player, wherever he was spending his eternity, got a chuckle out of it.

Thursday, September 27, 2018

Remembrance, heaven and the first theonoia.

Ever since my days in the monastery, when I took his name, I’ve been a devotee of St. Dismas. That classic interaction between the Crucified Christ and the Good Thief—Dismas says “Remember me when you come into your Kingdom” and Jesus responds “Today you will be with me in Paradise.”—the words “Remember me" still make me sit up and listen.

If “Staying with Suspension” has it correct, Contemplation, Enlightenment, humility and “having the mind of Christ are all a matter of remaining at what it calls the "first theonoia,” a place of pure, unanalyzed perception. Normally, we think of memory like it's a mental maneuver that fishes insights or experiences out of the file cabinet of who we used to be-- in the service of who we currently think we are. If such egotism is ultimately a mask we have to get rid of, "memory" has some limitations.

Aspiring to the first theonoia gives the Jewishness of Christianity’s origins a run for its money. Remembrance is absolutely pivotal to Judaism. The answer to the Passover question “Why is this night different from all other nights” begins with the words “we were slaves of Pharaoh in Egypt.” For Jews, Remembrance is a way of actualizing God’s saving potential, an act that gave their lives freedom and law and promise. The Scripture frequently says “Remember, O Lord, your people.” In psalm 25, the poet says “Remember not the sins of my youth.”

This all builds on a single assertion: What God fails to remember does not exist. And it broadens easily. When Dismas said “Remember me, when you come into your kingdom,” he was teaching us that “What the messiah fails to remember is not saved.”

But if past and future don’t exist, if the first theonoia is worth remaining at, the way we throw around the word “remember” needs to be workshopped. Taking everything Under the Influence has said about cognition into consideration, it makes sense to say “Remembering is a dismembering of the Self.

It follows from this that past and future are deconstructed too. The past and the future are about actualizing potential and being grateful. The only reason the passover meal and the eucharist claim to make the past present is to live in accord with God’s will right at this moment. The only reason the future is something to aspire to is because we want to hope in God’s providence, and be grateful for it, in the now. If we can’t do that, then our rumination about past and future become unreasonable attempts at control: we mull over the past and feel anxious about the future. We cultivate expectations about how life should be—sometimes, much to our own dismay, we even call those expectations themselves ‘hope' and it creates myriad resentments. Remembering where I came from, hoping for the future have become excuses for living in remorse and anxiety, for seeing the worst parts of my “self” hemming me in, in front and behind.

So remembrance is a dismembering of the self. But Remembrance, in Jewish thought, leads to heaven. Jesus response to Dismas was “Today, you will be with me in paradise.” Heaven is another concept that needs to be workshopped. In the post “Emptiness in the Life of God: Resurrecting a Concept," I’ve identified Non-being as heaven. It can also be God—whether we mean God as "personal deity", or God as “impersonal ground of being.” Hazrat Inayat Khan, the late 19th and early 20th century sufi teacher wrote "Non-existence Sings with the Song of the Harp. To Him we return.” In this case, Non-existence, which I have Identified with Heaven, is identified as personal—analogous to the higher power. Ultimately, the point is that heaven, at the very least, is living on resources that aren’t self—something bigger and more free than ego and attachment and desire. It’s Nonself, or the Soul, that gets the work done. Non-being, beyond the confines of an incarnation, is heaven.

There’s a Koan that addresses this: case 29 in the Hekiganroku, the second of three famous collections of Koans. It says “A monk asked Daizui “When the Kalpa fire flares up and the great cosmos is destroyed, I wonder, will ‘it’ perish or will it not perish?” Zui said, “it will perish.” The monk said “Then will it be gone with the other?” Zui said, "it will be gone with the other.”

Katsuki Sekida, editor of the collection of koans I work out of, processes this Koan as an understandable attempt to figure out what happens after we die. It is, in essence, three questions: first, it asks if we will be gone. Then it asks if we will be alone when we’re gone. And if we won’t, it asks what will happen to the others.

As is typical of Koans, that’s not all that’s happening. Remember that Koans collapse time. When Daizui answers “Will it be gone” by saying “it will be gone” he’s asking, in essence, why the self that is “us” isn’t gone already. When Daizui answers says it will be gone “with the other” he’s assuring us that “the beyond” is at least an experience of non-self, but we realize too that what we are, with the other, is gone. Nothing of “self or other, here or there" is left for us to cling to. The answer to the Koan, indeed, heaven itself, is the first theonoia. It’s either pure perception in the here and now, or it’s nothing.

If we take the theories of Under the Influence, the Jewish sense of remembering, or the work of Koans seriously, past and future cease to matter because all the potential of the present is actualized. This vision of Heaven accords with the four humble truths of Jesus, mentioned in last week’s post. If heaven is anything, it’s non-being. And the way to get there, in this life, is non-self and the Tenfold Way. When those teachings translate into actual, practical ways to remain at the first theonoia, then what Therese of Lisieux said is true: “All the way to heaven is heaven.” All that’s needed, I suppose, to wake me from my denial, is the deafening hush of one hand, clapping.

Thursday, September 20, 2018

Where we've been so far: The Basic Teachings of Under the Influence

Under the Influence hopes to impart the equanimity of the Messiah. With the Church, Under the Influence considers Christ to be a definitive revelation. If the Church should choose to claim exclusive rights to rectitude, however, Under the Influence will go quiet: when people know who they are, they can let others be a little bit right as well. When people know their liabilities, they dispense with attempts to convert others, and instead they're eager to troubleshoot their own denial.

Knowing the usefulness of their own tradition is, in the end, the very reason people of faith examine the resources of other traditions. Under the Influence reminds the Church of its own words: Nostra Aetate’s claim, for instance, that "The Catholic Church rejects nothing that is true and holy in [Non Christian] religions. She regards with sincere reverence those ways of conduct and of life, those precepts and teachings which, though differing in many aspects from the ones she holds and sets forth, nonetheless often reflect a ray of that Truth which enlightens all men. Indeed, she proclaims, and ever must proclaim Christ "the way, the truth, and the life" (par. 2).  

In other words, if a teaching is the way, the truth and the life, that teaching is Christ, whether it comes from Buddha or Torah or Hanuman. This curiosity to know other faith traditions is an obligatory part of being a Catholic, but being Catholic is a help to salvation at best—by the Church's own admission: Those who, through no fault of their own, do not know the Gospel of Christ or his Church, but who nevertheless seek God with a sincere heart, and, moved by grace, try in their actions to do his will as they know it through the dictates of their conscience - those too may achieve eternal salvation." CCC 847

This is no mere "tolerance:" rather, Under the Influence would have the Church join students of all traditions who have taken their seat at the feet of Wisdom. There may but one path for each of us, but there are certainly many paths for God. We are not Students of the Way until this tension renders us quiet. We have not heard Rabbouni’s voice until he speaks to each one of us alone, about each one of us alone. We are not Students of the Way until we’ve seen that Wisdom is equally accessible to all, and that we need the mirror of others to clearly see ourselves.

Among teaching tools for Wisdom, Koans—driven by paradox, as they are—these have pride of place. In a Koan, the Cosmic Consciousness wields creative tension like a sword: the Divine calls our own consciousness to expand. Koans do certain "transformative work:" they render all places “here,” make all distances nil and all times “now." They render all people “me,” and obscure the lines between hearing and feeling. They make all processes realized, and divorce stimulus from response. They unite opposites—and as such, heal the divisions in the human psyche that began in abstraction, continued in sin, and embedded themselves in cultural deludedness.

So far, this is what Under the Influence has discerned to be true:

God is a person-with-a-nature, not a person-with-a-self: God’s attributes are the closest thing he has to a self. I, too, am a person, not a self. My Ego is a false self. I wear an ego around town, the combined projection of the eight evil thoughts. Due to these mutually donned disguises, God and I are distant. I over identify with ego and attachment. Morality holds sway: some paths are holier than others, heaven above is a remote goal, just as hell below is a fear. I substitute examination for experience. I substitute beliefs for belief. As I move out of denial, through the dark night of the senses and the spirit, I become my true self more and more. In the healthiest of dualisms, we practice the presence of God. Christ has no body but ours, no hands but ours. In the healthiest of dualisms God perceives us through the body of Christ: we see Time, Desire, Reality Thought and Paradox, but through them God sees us. We realize that our “beliefs” about God are largely a system of blame, projection, dualism, superstition and egoism—and that was echoed in the culture: in its own dualism, in its projection of time into past and future, in its moralistic equation of humanity with its actions. We hoped there might be a way to stop abstracting, to cease acting out of the false self. God’s gaze entices us.

At first we asked for a bottom line. And we found an answer in the five pillars of Catholicism: Prayer, Service, Creed, Seasonal Awareness, and the Practice of the Presence of God. After a while, the bottom line became less important. It wasn’t because we’d obtained what we’d desired, but because both the desiring, and the person doing it, diminished in importance.

The Cross, the place of Suspension, is the first Theonoia. It is the logos: symbolized by the serpent, it was with God in the beginning, just in the coded messages of the prophets and the psalms. The Logos is the truth to which the Sacraments point: Though concealed, God is literally present in all creation.The logos asks that broken-heartedness be a permanent reality for us. Humility is the natural tendency to remain at the first theonoia—a place of pure perception once confined to contemplation—and the foundation of Christian enlightenment. Inhabiting suspension empties us of self, and our desire of attachment. God, once distant and accessible only in ecstasies, draws closer as our humility becomes permanent.

As we move from dualism to monism, God sheds his attributes, his self to become the ground of being. No paths are better or worse, they just are. Working out our purgatorial predicament, our disposition alternates between times of serenity, when we feel united to God, and times of anxiety, when we feel distant from him—but the changes aren’t up to us, and have little to do with our desire. As holiness grows, holiness becomes less of a merit badge, and consciousness of sin grows alongside our knowledge of God’s mercy. But we don’t interact with God as a person, the way we did when dualism held sway. Now God is as close as our breath: it’s us who live far from ourselves.

And that is how it was, in the beginning: God and humanity were one. Then it fragmented, thought about existing instead of just being. All life became abstraction.  People were given bodies to learn to return. God sent rabbouni to recapitulate all things, remake all creation in God’s image. His teachings all had the four Gospel Seals: impermanence, non-self, acceptance and interbeing. We were given the Humble Tenfold Way—so that we could gradually embody the lessons of the logos and the teachings of the Cross. And in the end, (perhaps after multiple lifetimes) in the breaking of the bread we see the body of Christ: the strangers we were to ourselves show themselves to have been Christ the whole time.

Divinization is just that, becoming God in unity with our true selves, the Christ within. When we saw it as the end of a moralistic journey, heaven seemed like a reward, where we, at best, sat on clouds with God. Eventually, perhaps after many lifetimes of Christ being reborn in us, we saw it as the end of a journey of humility: heaven was a merging of our own consciousness back into Cosmic Consciousness.

Though Wisdom bucks logic, some concepts support its work better than others. In pursuit of union with God and the Crucified Christ, then, Under the Influence presents these core teachings. Suffering is not understandable or controllable by logical constructs: as such, it’s the perfect mouthpiece of the Logos. However, Under the Influence makes bold to claim that, were the Cross to enumerate its core teachings, these would be them.



The 4 Humble Truths

(On the Doctrine of The Cross, Part 1 and 2)

All life is abstraction
All is in need of recapitulation
The Vehicle of recapitulation is the Body of Christ
The Way of the Body of Christ is the Humble Tenfold Way


The Humble Tenfold Way

(On the Doctrine of The Cross, Part 1 and 2)

You do what you want, but I remember these using this acronym: Practice Perfects In All Eating, So We Knead The Bread.


Humble prayer
Humble presence
humble intention
humble action
humble effort
humble speech
humble work
humble knowing
humble thinking
humble belief


The 5 Sense Organs of the Body of Christ

(On the Doctrine of The Cross, Part 1 and 2)


Monistically, all these things are Christ’s Real presence, union with a God and True-Self in naked reality. Dualistically they’re how God perceives us.  I remember them with the acronym "True Divinization Really Takes Presence"


Time
Desire
Reality
Thought
Paradox


The 4 Gospel Seals

(On the Doctrine of The Cross, Part 1 and 2)

All Christian teachings will agree with these principles. These are the “marks” of Christian Transformation.

Impermanence
Non-self
Acceptance
Interbeing


The 5 Pillars of Catholicism

(The Five Pillars of Catholicism)

These are the 5 things with which every Catholic has to contend. Whether to contend with them is not optional, if we would call ourselves Catholic. How we contend with them is up to us.

Prayer
Service
Creed
Seasonal awareness
Practice of the Presence of God


Spiritual Stages

(On Trendy Brunch Spots and The Dark Night of the Self,
Defining Terms and Filling in Gaps)

Denial
Dark Night of the Senses
Dark Night of the Spirit
Suspension
Dark Night of the Self
Heaven/Divinization

The Theonoias

(Staying with Suspension: Christian thoughts on Wisdom, Cognition and Enlightenment)

1st theonoia: No difference between God and who I AM.  Non theorizing about either of them.  A state of pure perception

2nd Theonoia: Everything gets names and Labels.  Man gets a "garment of Flesh" or an ego. The False Self believes it, and the world, are permanent.  The True Self knows everything "Inter-is" in everything else, that the whole world is just patterns of energy, and people are just patterns of energy wrapped around consciousness.

3rd Theonoia: We string our labels together to get theories and physical laws and rules.


Self:

(On removing self from knowing,
Permanence, Self and Christianity)

Because all life is abstraction, self is synonymous with ego.  It can be, by degrees, healthier and unhealthier.  It is an abstracted identity, the net effect of the eight evil thoughts.  The eight evil thoughts are gluttony, greed, sloth sorrow, lust, wrath, vanity and pride.

The evil thoughts are, first and foremost, expressions of original sin--in that sense, they're universal, more a cause for compassion than anything else.  And only problematic if we willfully and habitually follow them.