Don: Today I am going to propose that perhaps the way back to god is not through discovery, revelation, or insight about god. The fact that there are so many different paths and revelations may be god’s way of teaching us that a religion that seeks or claims to penetrate the mind of god is misguided at best and utterly wrong at worst. The confusion of language in the Tower of Babel, the obfuscation in god’s revelation of himself to Elijah, the delineation of so many religions as paths to god, are perhaps all part of a deliberate strategy on god’s part that s/he is not to be known by mankind (in any but perhaps the most perfunctory way) through the intellect, the senses, or even the soul.
This is a striking proposition—if it is true. I certainly find it unsettling. But as a proposition, it inevitably emerges in light of our discussions in recent weeks, and must, it seems to me, be addressed. Is it possible that religion—or the way back to god—is not after all to be realized by greater awareness of god him- or herself? That it is not to be realized by a more comprehensive picture or more so-called truth about god, or by even better understanding god’s ways? That the essence of religion is not greater awareness of god, but greater awareness of ourselves?
Ar first glance, this seems preposterous, narcissistic, utterly misguided, unholy, and even downright evil. But is it at least possible? Is it possible that the mystery that god is the god of all mankind is revealed not through the concept of god’s universal love but through the concept that the way back to god is through self-awareness?
In Genesis 3 we see Adam and Eve living in a god-conscious, god-centered Garden. Although they were clearly aware of one another and of their surroundings, the focus of their consciousness was god—it was not themselves. Their self-awareness seemed peripheral to their awareness of god and of each other. Adam was aware that Eve was “bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh” (Genesis 2:23), but his self-awareness seemed to be subsumed within his awareness of god. Eating of the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil changed all that.
Upon hearing god approaching them in the Garden after they had eaten the forbidden fruit, they hid in the bushes. When god asked why, they offered their first self-assessment: “We hid because we were naked.” God’s response showed the weakness of their self-awareness: “Who told you you were naked? Did you eat the fruit of the tree that makes you feel naked?” There ensued a tsunami of self-awareness: Adam blamed Eve, then blamed god for creating Eve, and Eve blamed the serpent.
The fruit of the tree exposed the sinful self in all of us. It exposed self-love, self-acceptance, self-justification, self-righteousness, self-actualization, self-pity, and all other forms of self-focus and self-centeredness that are so common to the human condition. The way back to god, then, may be not through a better, more accurate, more concrete, more truthful understanding of god; rather, it may be through a better, more accurate, more concrete, more truthful understanding of ourselves.
A religion based upon self-realization sounds heretical and blasphemous and I am reluctant even to suggest it, because it may easily be misunderstood. I am not suggesting that such a religion would result in self-worship; on the contrary: I think it might rekindle the dying embers of an almost-extinguished Inner Light, activate the spiritual genome, and actualize the reality that we are created in the image of god and that the re-creation will be in that same image.
I think this is what Jesus meant when he said (Matthew 11:28-30):
“Come to Me, all who are weary and heavy-laden, and I will give you rest. Take My yoke upon you and learn from Me, for I am gentle and humble in heart, and you will find rest for your souls. For My yoke is easy and My burden is light.”
This is a call to give up one’s own ways, which are ways of hard labor and heavy burdens. Perhaps this is best illustrated in the self-awareness and the turning-back to god that is found in the story of the Prodigal Son who, after squandering his father’s inheritance in a far country, comes to realize that the self-centered path he has pursued is bankrupt. He says in Luke 15:17:
But when he came to his senses, he said, ‘How many of my father’s hired men have more than enough bread, but I am dying here with hunger!
Many translators translate “came to his senses”” as “came to himself.” This self-awareness is what put him back on the path back home, back to his father.
Notice the word “distant” in verse 13:
And not many days later, the younger son gathered everything together and went on a journey into a distant country,…
It is the Greek word makran, which appears in verse 20 translated as “a long way off”:
But while he was still a long way off, his father saw him and felt compassion for him,…
Though far from home, his father never lost sight of him.
In Acts 17:27, where Paul is giving a sermon on Mars Hill, he tells his audience…
…that they would seek God, if perhaps they might grope for Him and find Him, though He is not far from each one of us;…
Is it possible that the quest for god, for the revelation of god, which we know is full of contradictions, is really a misguided notion of the way back to god, and that the real way back is through a new and fresh understanding of ourselves? Should we not therefore focus on what the subject of religion—the concept that god is the god of all mankind—does to our self-awareness considering our position before god?
Paul and the Parable of the Prodigal both seem to be saying that god is not as far away as he seems. The Greek word for “not far” is also the word for “palpable”—something that can be felt. God is palpably close—so close that one can reach out and touch him. He is not so far as to be unreachable, untouchable, by all mankind. This means that human senses can indeed bring all mankind back into a relationship with god.
Perhaps, from god’s standpoint, all of our seeking for him is misguided. Perhaps all the different and contradictory pictures of him have been deliberately planted by him to show us that they are not the way back to him; that the way back to the Garden, the way back to the god-centered relationship Adam and Eve had with god before the Fall, is an honest understanding of oneself and one’s condition of being absent from god and being in need of god.
David: The “Three C’s” of Al Anon (the association for spouses and other loved ones of alcoholics) say that you did not Cause the alcoholism in your loved one, you cannot Cure it, and you cannot Control it. That takes the focus away from the alcoholic and back towards oneself. One has choices, and one can control one’s own choices. Through those self-aware choices one may affect the relationship in a positive way. Perhaps there is something in the relationship with god that is very similar.
Benjamin: When I was younger, being spiritual meant being obedient to the strictures of my religion, and being obedient in that way was hard and laborious, and up to this day I don’t think I can say I ever heard the voice of god. But in recent years, in constantly wondering how to be a better person—without reference to religion—I have grown more at ease with myself, with my place in life, with my relationship with my community and with society as a whole, and with my ability to sympathize and empathize with other people. The thoughts that have led me to these results seem to be as embedded in me personally as they are in any religious teaching or Commandments.
Don: The concept I am wrestling with is that our proper relationship with god is one that is wholly dependent upon god. The anomaly is not a god-centered self-awareness; rather, it is a self-awareness apart from god. Hence, we saw Adam and Eve, and the Prodigal Son, leaving god through a false self-awareness and (in the case of the Prodigal Son) returning to him through a genuine self-awareness.
Benjamin: Was the Prodigal going home to rebuild his relationship with the father, or just to try to satisfy his own needs which he could not satisfy in the far country?
Don: The Prodigal certainly had a notion that he would be materially better off at home, even as a servant, than he was in the far country.
David: The Prodigal’s brother had a self-centered god (father)-awareness. He acknowledge his father by following the rules, and was upset that he was not treated as well as the Prodigal. The Prodigal, on the other hand, had developed through his privations a god (father)-centered self-awareness. Before his downfall, he had pure self-awareness—god (father) did not even enter into his picture of the world.
Don: In the story of the Prodigal at least, it seems that adversity is what caused self-appraisal and genuine self-awareness. Without adversity, it would not have been possible, it seems. This seems related to the mystery of evil—of why god allows evil to exist.
Chris: It seems to me the Prodigal came to realize—became aware of—the characteristics of his father, because in the far country he was treated far worse than his father treated the servants at home. The realization may have been prompted by a need that was essentially selfish, but it led him to the truth about his father. It might not have been the father’s love he went home for; but in recognizing that his father would provide for him, he was in a sense acknowledging that love.
Kiran: The Prodigal must have realized his father’s character before he reached his nadir of competing with the pigs for their swill. He must have realized that it was his selfishness that caused his deteriorating condition. In the parable of the Pharisee and the Tax Collector, both are in the presence of god, and both have self-awareness; but the Pharisee is god-aware but self-centered (Luke 18:11-12)…
“The Pharisee stood by himself and prayed: ‘God, I thank you that I am not like other people—robbers, evildoers, adulterers—or even like this tax collector. I fast twice a week and give a tenth of all I get.’”
…whereas the tax collector is god-centered but self-aware (verse 13):
“But the tax collector stood at a distance. He would not even look up to heaven, but beat his breast and said, ‘God, have mercy on me, a sinner.’”
Jay: There seem to be two kinds of self-actualization: One based upon self-reliance, and one based upon reliance on god. In today’s society, self-actualization is considered a worthy goal, but it also seems to be the self-reliant version society goes for.
Charles: We can look at what happened in the Garden as the emergence of ego. The Garden was a fully integrated, complete whole. There were no distinctions between the individual/the self and god until the Fall, at which point individual, personal identities suddenly became distinct. A cell in the human body is part of an integrated whole but is unable to survive without it. The emergence of a sense of self is like the emergence of a cancerous cell, which destroys that integrity. The emergence of the ego, of personal identity separate and distinct from god, was the source of all the trouble that was to come. The recognition of that is perhaps the first step on the path back to god. The infinity of creation—just look up, at the night sky!—reminds us of our insignificance in relation to the whole, but we are nevertheless a part of it. We go astray in viewing ourselves as not being part of it.
Kiran: If we can reach independent self-realization, then we can find god, independent of religion and independent of god’s involvement. In that case, god is indeed the god of all mankind, since culture and geography don’t enter into it. It is purely personal. The question then is: How do we reach independent self-realization, without religion or someone to tell us that god exists?
Ada: We are raised to be independent thinkers and it comes almost as a disappointment to realize we can’t handle every situation alone and that we need god. We need to be educated to understand that the way back out of our situation is to be not in the flesh but in the spirit.
Michael: I too used to search for god and the truth at the logical level. I wanted to make god clear, so I could use him in a sentence. The notion of a distant god did not fit my need. Recently, something shifted inside me—something that brought god closer, that made god seem to be part of everything around me.
Josh: I think god has gone to great lengths to preserve our individuality and our freedom of choice. Maybe that’s why god seems so distant at times. If he came and showed us all of himself so there was no room for doubt, then there would be no room for doubt, no reason for us to search for self-realization, and no reason to choose to be part of god’s plan. It seems almost silly that god intended a blessing by removing himself, yet he did, in order that we would have the choice to choose him.
Chris: The first of the 12 steps of AA (Alcoholics Anonymous—the organization for alcoholics themselves) is to admit that one is powerless over alcohol and that one’s life has become unmanageable. Second, one has to believe in a power greater than oneself. And third, one has to be willing to turn one’s life over to management by that power. I think alcohol could be used as a metaphor for god in these steps back to life before the “fall”. This is what the Prodigal Son had to do—recognize that there was a power greater than himself who could put him back on the right path, and then be prepared to give up self-will—control over his life—to that power.
Kiran: So in thinking we can manage our own lives by seeking god, we create religion. But when we realize that we are powerless to manage our lives and then seek god’s help, we find god on our own and create a genuine relationship with god.
David: That is the message I get from the Beatitudes.
Charles: The “I”—the individual ego, the splitting of the “We”, the separation from the whole—is the cause of our problems. It leads to actions inimical to the whole and locks us into a world of impermanent forms and decay and death. The emergence of ego destroyed our relationship with god; only when the ego is put back in its cage can the relationship with god, and the integrity of his whole creation, be restored.
Benjamin: I still struggle with the question: Beyond pure material survival, to what end is self-actualization—with or without god? It seems that it takes adversity to bring one closer to god. But then, what of those people who happen never to face adversity?
David: Mitochondria are alien, non-human, organisms that live in symbiosis inside our cells. We give them food, they give us energy. Suppose the mitochondria figured out who and what they are—suppose they achieved self-realization? What might they do? How might they feel?
Kiran: They might think they don’t need us any more and strike out independently, leaving our cells and our bodies. I think that god benefits from having us as part of his integrated whole—his kingdom—in a similar way to which we benefit from our mitochondria.
Benjamin: So does god exist without mankind?
Kiran: He must, because he created us.
Michael: I am reminded of Maslowe’s hierarchy of needs: At every step in the hierarchy, we relate differently to god. At lower stages, we need people to help us; at the highest stage of self-actualization, we are pretty independent.
* * *
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.