Burning Bush and Whirlwind: A Teaching in "Being"

Quiet is difficult because, energetically and in terms of physical sensation, existence is intense. The skill of quiet is learning to sit with energy and sensation, no matter how intense, no matter whether the story we attach to it is negative or positive. I'm about to issue what I know is a big ask. (It'll make bible scholars with either classical training or baked-in prejudices wiggle in their chairs a bit.) Here it is: let's suppose that Moses' burning bush, and Job's whirlwind were both "inner phenomena." [bxA]

We can wrap a bit of "theological theory" around it, for people that dig working that way. Ekhart Tolle supposed that we each had an"energy body"--this could also be the "body of light" monks attributed to God during the anthropomorphite controversy, but I don't want to overtax the limits of your willingness for "premise granting"--regardless, plausible scenarios exist in which Moses went into deep prayer, had a non-dual experience of his own nervous system, and came out talking about a burning bush and a God whose name was "I AM." Job heaved his entire, rather intellectual process of "suffering management" into a whirlwind and came out convinced of the effort's inadequacy. He said "therefore, I despise my life, and repent in dust and ashes." He said it while still very much alive--perhaps he was actually referring to ego.

All that both men were doing was learning to deal with intense energy and sensation. Moses found a way to be not-two with intense energy, and Job learned to sit with sensation without "forming an identity" whose illusions included permanence and control.

Peddlers of wisdom have a vested interest in their audience's buy in to rightness and entitlement, but let's understand that's just "egos in dialogue." I see a bit of that in the clinging of modern debaters, in all manner of movements that turn identity into politics, in people of unconscious privilege. But let me give an example that's closer to home. When I say "Moses' theophany was an inner experience," part of me is listening for those who say "that's right on." When I say "Job, chastened, gained a bit of space and freedom from his false self," I'm watching for the heads that nod. Let's remember that, when the temple veil of ego is torn in two, we'll know that to be the emptiest of games we could possibly play. Ultimately, I'm not trying to sell you on a perspective.

Here it is: sitting still with intense energy and sensation with no efforts at "diminishment by manipulation" is a skill. Absent its acquisition, our ability to rest in existence is compromised. Experiencing "mind cancelling union with energy" is intense. We all spend more time being "selves who arrange things by preference"--and there can be a great deal of fear and disorientation in the moments before we finally or temporarily give that a rest.

People grieve all the time. They grieve when expensive appliances break, they grieve the loss of loved ones, they grieve life's big transitions. Sitting with intense energy and sensation ranks among the final bequests of our dying selves. The question is: if allowing "identity to be subsumed by the intensity of incarnation" were part of the curriculum, would you learn it? If failure to get cuddly with intensity renders your egoic autopilot bitter, would you adjust for the preservation of your serenity?

Today, that is our assignment. The Teacher awaits our answer.