Belonging & fulfillment

Many of the comments so far on this blog carry their own food for thought. A comment how many `followers' of a spiritual movement find a lot of benefit from it, for instance.

I agree. So perhaps it is good to repeat that the word `pitfall' is meant traditionally, in the sense that one can fall into it, but one can also avoid it. I also would like to repeat that I have seen many people following some spiritual movement, who lead their lives in what to me seems a very spiritual way.

In addition I feel I have also enjoyed benefit from my 12-yr association with a spiritual movement. Beforehand I had a vague idea of how I wanted to be a spiritual person, now my thoughts and feelings on `being' seem much clearer, and in this direction it gives some peace and acceptance inside.

Another benefit which I always felt clearly is the meeting of other people who are interested in a spiritual way of life (whatever that may mean). Now that I've stopped participating in that particular movement, I find much less opportunity to exchange ideas and experiences around (practical) spirituality, with others. And another drawback: a number of good friends I see far less than before, because we used to see a lot of each other at spiritual gatherings (biweekly group meditations and seminars). Since agenda's are usually full, in retrospect I see that these gatherings tend to work positively on people having time and a secure setting to exchange `real' issues.

Where in the secular world can one find a trusted place to regularly exchange deeper feelings, problems, suggestions about daily life in a spiritual light, with well-meaning heart-oriented people?

So if you would ask me, I would have to admit that I miss certain people, I miss some of the special aspects -like inner quietness, tranquil social being together, interested timeless exchanges- of especially the smaller spiritual gatherings.

In a way, I think, belonging to a spiritual movement (including religions) resembles belonging to a family. And if one is a beloved cherished member of a family, well then it is easier to experience fulfillment in one's life. Is my estimate, based on our gregarious nature. But it is also my personal experience. Having stopped `belonging' makes it harder for me to experience a sense of contributing to a more spiritual humanity, for instance. Having stopped `belonging' makes me feel less connected to certain cherished people who I used to see far more often before. And there is more to this than meets the first glance.

#####

So...pitfalls? What pitfalls? We usually consider belonging and fulfillment to be very positive things. What could possibly be an issue of concern here?

#####

It is perhaps not a simple thing, so I hope to be able to express myself sufficiently clear with regard to this question. First of all, one issue of concern -already discussed in previous posts- is the `us & them' phenomenon. Members of the spiritual-movement-family are `us', non-followers are `them'.

But what I really mean here is this. The feeling of belonging and fulfillment can be a major reason for people to become, be or stay a follower of the spiritual movement. With some spiritual movements one could even say that people are lured into membership precisely by appealing to their sense of belonging, which is then consistently reinforced by family-like gatherings or even living together as a commune.

But in the end, membership of the spiritual movement/family means acceptance of the Method, the Leader, the Theory of the movement.

To put it more sharply: one is accepted and cherished as a `spiritual family member' only as long as one is an unquestioning and uncriticizing participant. Because the whole well-being of the spiritual family depends on the Absolute Correctness of the Theory, the Holiness of the Leader, the Efficacy of the Method.

#####

So what can this do with people? Will we, like the herd animals we are, accommodate and adjust our opinions and thoughts and questions to the prevailing group authority? Or will we stay focused on purity, clarity, simplicity, consistency, deeper understanding?

Will we -even if only subconsciously- weigh what we say and more importantly what we think, together with what the `family' says and thinks? And if the two do not agree, can we even contemplate to cut ourselves loose, or do we want to remain belonging? Remain connected, part of the family?

#####

So group dynamics also come into play. But that is not what I primarily mean by the pitfall `belonging and fulfillment'. To repeat and summarize, what I mean is this.

Belonging to a group (any group, but some are more fulfilling than others) gives us fulfillment. To me this seems to be hardwired into the human being as a social animal. The feeling of belonging and fulfillment can easily become a mechanism to accept flawed ideologies, implausible ideas, money schemes, contradictory behaviour, coercion even.

If I feel belonging and fulfilled, I can easily think this comes from the Absolute Perfection of the Method.

`The Method has to be wonderful, because I feel so wonderfully fulfilled ever since I started it'.

(From this it is but a small step to the pitfall `happiness & bliss'.)

#####

To me, in any spiritual movement that I would want to belong to it should be common to address these issues. To encourage individual thinking, criticizing, questioning. To be aware of group dynamics and, as a group, to not give in to group dogmatism. To not ostracize or silence people who speak out against prevailing winds, and to not overly welcome only positive sounds.

Something like that. Although Groucho Marx probably said it all with `I would not want to be a member of any club that will have me'....

[Not the clearest post, I admit, I find it hard to express what I perceive as the real issues. perhaps later posts will clarify some more. To be continued.]

Moral authority, orthodoxy, rituals: the common trinity of spiritual movements

Now that I've made up my mind to write about the pitfalls of spirituality, I find the train of thoughts gathering some momentum. For the past 15 years I've been thinking on these issues. Also I devoted and still devote a very substantial part of my energy to developing an inner spiritual comportment, as well as different types of analysis of what I mean by that, and what others appear to mean by that.

I apologize for writing long and sometimes complicated sentences. Perhaps my style will improve over the posts to come. For now I'm trying to get a certain stream flowing, and therefore I give my mind free rein.

I've discovered that many people participating in some spiritual movement will block out the mind, block out simple logic. Their reaction to this blog could very easily be: You must not trust the mind, you must feel with the heart. How to explain to someone blocking out logic, that for me also the mind is just an instrument? Spirituality involves a loving heart, first and foremost in my not so humble opinion. To arrive at this, I believe we can well use the mind. This use is perhaps not a necessity for everybody. But if my heart experiences unease, if I get signals that not all is well on the path, then why not use my mind to determine where I took a wrong turn?

The orthodox answer of many spiritual movements: you cannot trust your own mind. Oh, I say, but it is my heart which is protesting. Orthodox answer: your heart is not yet pure, therefore you are guided by desires, please surrender to God, Guide, Method because that is the only way to get past your own blocking desires.

So now we have it. Here comes a real crux. The question is:

What do I trust? Who do I trust?

######

Orthodox answer 1: You cannot trust yourself. Why? Because: look at the mess you have created in your life. Look at the mess people create in their lives. You and they are running after worldly desires. But your heart is protesting, deep inside. The Real You longs for spiritual fulfillment. But your desires and your mind are blocking the Real You. You will never overcome this by yourself. You need help. Well, actually help is not enough. You need to surrender to higher authority, set aside your ego, set aside your mind, to free your heart of all the unnecessary rubbish and grossness it has accumulated. Come to our Method. Surrender unto Him. He will guide you. In your heart you will feel Love start to blossom. Your problems will be over, although perhaps not your worldly trials. But these will no longer bog you down. Experience our Divinity for yourself, and do not trust your Western mind. Look at the spiritual mess Western society is in, can you trust the Western approach?

First objection by truly interested seeker (TIS): I've tried your method for a long time now. I find my heart protesting against many elements of your method and movement. My mind finds serious flaws in your reasonings. My eyes see that the followers of your method are creating the same spiritual mess as most any other organization, only they are more hypocritical about it: they cover it up. Sanctimonious behaviour is rampant, especially amongst senior members and authoritative figures. Your `Guide' is inapproachable in a normal manner, but does not hesitate to tell me I need to feel ashamed of wasting my unique opportunity to escape eternal damnation / reincarnation / samskaric pain / whatever. (Why ashamed? Because He is giving His Everything, He suffers immensely, He is putting Himself out for Humanity, and I carelessly refuse to cooperate, thereby draining Him and Humanity for completely selfish reasons.)

Orthodox answer 2: You are being fooled by your ego. The Guide is pure love, and is not pressuring you in any way. This is just resistance from your ego, which clings to its lower desires like an infant clings to its lollipop. Please participate in a special cleansing session, so that you may become rid of these ego-bonds. You cannot trust your feelings in this. Has not the Guide brought you, lovingly and with completely selfless service to humanity, past many similar obstacles on your path? Do not make the mistake that many have irredeemably made before you by leaving our movement, you might never get another opportunity to attain liberation, to find God.

Truly interested seeker: First you tell me to trust my heart, and disregard my mind. Now you tell me to not even trust my heart, since it is corrupted by my ego. According to you I must only trust the `Guide'. But by whose authority can I trust this guide, if not by my own heart and mind? Look at all the other movements which say exactly similar things, but which you nonetheless denounce as mistaken and potentially dangerous. But moreover: look at your own movement. You are claiming that (other) religions are mistaken, and that the hearts and minds of their practitioners are so rigid that their Real Heart cannot speak. Yet now I tell you what my heart and mind are speaking, and then you say that this cannot be my Real Heart because it is not in concordance with what the Guide says and what the Method says and the Scripture...and they are Always Correct. Because they are Divinely charged, inspired,...

####

We can go on like this for some time. My point is this:

Most spiritual movements try to establish some Moral Authority outside of the practitioner -even though many of these movements claim that the only Real Authority is in the practitioner's own heart.

From this outside Moral Authority (yes, the Leader which most of us prefer, because we are after all group animals with herd instinct) comes orthodoxy. Because to disagree with the Moral Authority is to disagree with the moral majority, which this majority does not find appealing because it threatens the group functioning and the Leader mechanism.

Orthodoxy is then solidified in rituals. Because if an Absolute Moral Authority has said that prasad / chalice of wine / headscarf / prayer at noon / circumcision / group meditation / scripture reading is... Holy & Mandatory & ... then for ages to come, no one will dare question these things. Until some dissenter starts the following movement, becoming Guide etc. etc.

And so the natural tendency of spiritual movements is to grow into religion. What are basic characteristics of religion, apart from the obvious abundance of rituals? This merits new posts.

To finish my point, let me put forward the way I've come to see things. God (spirituality, universal love, ...whatever name you want to use) is inside. Need we any authority outside to tell us what is inside? I don't think so, and it doesn't feel right either. Logical, because in the end this is an impossible setup. Without some final authority inside, we will not know how to choose from all the conflicting authorities outside. Perhaps we come across a guide who is willing to help us clarify what is inside.

When can we trust such a guide, in the normal sense of trust? Probably when this person doesn't ask us for Absolute Trust. When this person is simple, personal, unassuming, not dressed in white with 25 important followers clinging to His Every Sacred Word. And very important (although one would not believe that such a shallow precaution could be so prevalently necessary): when this person is not asking for money all the time. Oh, but it's not for Himself you know! He never thinks of personal gain! He only needs money -and really speaking He doesn't need anything, He only does it for us and for His Master- so we can help truly interested seekers find this wonderful Method, which is unique.

Spiritual authority needs legitimization, but do we need spiritual authority?

Following up on the previous post, the common path of spiritual movements with a Guide who is really a Leader seems to be as follows.

In order for Someone to have absolute moral authority, this Person must in some way be legitimized. Most movements spare time, effort nor money to reinforce the Legitimization of the Guide. (Who is a man, in say 99.99% of the spiritual movements.)

A very good practice is to have the current Guide legitimized in a line of previously established Superholy Predecessors. The Great Founder of the movement obviously is the first, and His Legitimization can be embellished all the more the longer He is no more with us in His Physical Form.

`Stars began to blaze in that night of that year, and the holy Aszjnabaraki spoke: He has come. Already at His birth, it was noticed that people and animals grew quiet around Him. At the age of four, His mother was surprised one day to find Him....etc.'

It becomes more elaborate as time passes, but the essence of the legitimization mythos is practically the same in all movements: the Guide is legitimized through Holy Divine Sources (backed up by a lot of books, testimonials etc), which of course cannot be tested by mere mortals, BUT mere mortals can experience the Love emanating from the Guide as a palpable proof of the legitimization... Although of course proof is not necessary since we must rely on Faith. [more on faith later]

#######

I'm putting in these #-s because already we are being pulled in a direction here which -in my not so humble opinion (imnsho)- should read CAUTION, do you really want to go here?

Because to me it seems that any TRUE spiritual guide would NEVER go near anything having to do with moral authority.

A true spiritual guide...that rarest of all human beings...might be inclined to help you find a true spiritual guide within yourself. I would be surprised if this was not the case. And it would mean that the number of guides increases. No followers to speak of.

Oh, but wait! If I am my own guide, then blimey, I must make my own decisions, take my own responsibility...no way, I'd rather be with the herd, in the herd, cosy, warm, following Him.

#######

If you are a seeker of true spirituality (and why else would you read this blog, or to put it more directly: what other thing in life is really worthwile?) then my question to you is:

Is not in yourself the very thing you seek?

You may be desperate, you may think someone else can help you feel spiritual, balanced, loving,...and I think this is correct, there are people everywhere willing to devote their time and energy and love to help others find spirituality, balance, love. But where does this idea of moral authority come from? Where does the idea even of morality as an external obligation come from?

If my guide (or one of my guides, or all of them) gives me some clue, some direction, some example - where's the authority? And if I don't follow the clue, direction, example...well so what? SHAME on me? A WASTE of a UNIQUE opportunity to wash away my sins, clean my samskaras, shorten my longsuffering reincarnation cycle?

Please, dear reader, consider what would happen if you don't believe this type of moral pressure. If you refuse this combination of Fear and Temptation which characterizes the vast majority of so-called spiritual movements. And shed it, like you take off an ill-fitting itchy garment.

Would it mean, as most movements suggest or (more likely) strongly affirm, that your Salvation becomes endangered? That your Soul will accrue more darkness, and that you are at risk of debauchery, materialism, clogging your spiritual arteries?

Or would it mean you are realizing your own path, with your own heart, following the true guide within, with HELP from your loving guides but without authority, rank, surrender, obedience, submission, ... and other excess luggage.

If you were this loving God, which of these scenarios would you choose for your human beings who are after all made in your image?

A first list of pitfalls of spirituality

In this first post, let me simply name some pitfalls of spirituality that i perceive to crop up in many spiritual efforts, movements, religions.

1. guidance
2. universal truth & absolute truth
3. bliss & happiness, pain & sorrow
4. morality & moral pressure
5. before & after life
6. wonders & miracles
7. money
8. power
9. belonging & fulfillment
10. group dynamics
11. us & them
12. woman & man
13. ego & selflessness
14. mind & heart, logic & feeling
15. fear & temptation/reward

The list is not meant to be exhaustive, and I don't think that the above items are all completely separate either. It's just a working list to start from, as we go along the blog probably will evolve.