 |
| Zen and the Art of Calvinist Epistemology* by Fearghas MacFhionnlaigh ______________________________________ CONTENTS ______________________________________ 1. Intro ______________________________________ 2. Zen ______________________________________ 3. Detachment ______________________________________ 4. Praxis ______________________________________ 5. Nature ______________________________________ 6. Pattern ______________________________________ 7. Sovereignty of God ______________________________________ 8. Cornelius Van Til: Polarities and Paradoxes ______________________________________ 9. Herman Dooyeweerd & Sphere-Sovereignty | Peter Ralston & Cheng Hsin Martial Arts ______________________________________ 10. Back to Nature ______________________________________ 11. Early Gaelic Nature-Poetry ______________________________________ 12. Epistemological Self-Consciousness ______________________________________ 13. Brute Otherness, Nothingness, and Wilderness ______________________________________ 14. Between Two Insanities ______________________________________ 15. Icy water ______________________________________ 16. in Closing...
______________________________________
*NOTE: I am not sure when this essay was begun. A decade ago? Anyway, it started off as a reply to an email from a friend, which I then posted online, with permission. It has survived various blog, computer and internet crises. I continued to add to it as my thinking developed. Thus it was never a frontloaded polemic, but a kind of 'journaled' exploration of the subject in real time. A true exploration in the sense that I did not know where the green foothill byways and blue mountain paths would lead me. For example, en route Herman Dooyeweerd changed from passing acquaintance to constant companion. As well as grappling with the latter's own challenging writings, I began reading (and re-reading) Dr J. Glenn Friesen’s many learned articles on Dooyeweerd.** These became treasured 'vade mecums' on my journey (and remain so). This led of course to a far more profound grasp of Dooyeweerd's thought by the end of my essay than is evident earlier on (for instance, Dooyeweerd in later years wanted the term 'Calvinistic' dropped in favour of simply 'Christian').
Now, perhaps ten years on, my appreciation of Dooyeweerd has been exponential. So should I keep rewriting this essay to reflect whereever I am now "at"? I think not. That would be like an artist painting every new picture on the self-same canvas. Each previous stage of the journey effaced in the process. Only the latest location glimpsed.
Apologies. I have now over-talked this over-written essay. While an important undertaking for me, it clearly remains a modest and amateur effort academically. I am not at all qualified in the philosophical field and don't "keep up with the literature". I am a retired art teacher (there are of course overlaps in subjects). Rather than wipe my earlier daubs back with a 'paint-rag', I propose to lightly revise or editorially lose anything in the essay I now deem particularly unhelpful (or embarrassing), and add bracketed notes where my present perspective bears mentioning.
At the end of his (1935) Foreword to 'A New Critique of Theoretical Thought', Dooyeweerd exclaims: "For as a matter of fact the precarious and changing opinion of our fellows is not even comparable with the inner happiness and peace that accompanies scientific labour when it is based upon Christ, Who is the Way, the Truth, and the Life!" I was particularly elated to read that since the Scripture reference was seminal in my own anguished resort to Christ when I was age 16, deeply struggling with the question "What is reality?". Having now very recently left age 66 behind, I appreciate anew that Christ is not theoretical. Rather, He is the One "From Whom, through Whom, and to Whom are all things". The One "with Whom we all have to do". The One Who alone is "Journey, Reality, Existence".
(Fearghas MacFhionnlaigh, 1 Dec 2015) **UPDATE 3 Sept 2021. I most emphatically do NOT endorse J. Glenn Friesen’s new 2021 book ‘Christian Nondualism in Jewish Historical Context’, which rejects the authority of Scripture, the doctrine of the Trinity, the full divinity of Christ [“we can pray to him as we pray to other saints for help and guidance” (p 427)], the atonement, the bodily resurrection of Christ, the coming judgement by Christ, etc. Rather, I resolutely stand with Herman Dooyeweerd when he asserts:
|
mardi 1 décembre 2015
Zen and the Art of Calvinist Epistemology
1. Intro
1. Intro
Dear Alan, Sorry to take so very long responding. A few pressures got in the way, and I couldn't begin to answer your Calvinism and Zen question anyway without a deal of thought. As I was writing, it occurred to me that I might usefully copy this material (with your indulgence) to a few others who have some interest in these matters (or at least some curiosity - if not alarm - about where I'm coming from). This consideration accounts for the text falling into a less personal register as it goes on. And is also the reason why I at points seem to be explaining Van Til and Dooyeweerd to you, when you are already more conversant with their thought than I am. Apologies for these things.
As always, I am a bit awestruck at your reading programme! I am, of course, very much on board with your impatience of MacDiarmid's, Sorley's, (and much of that Scottish literary generation's) indulgence of Sovietism. I concur also with your "post tenebras lux" approach. I was reading this morning Psalm 139 - "If I say, 'Surely the darkness will overwhelm me
As always, I am a bit awestruck at your reading programme! I am, of course, very much on board with your impatience of MacDiarmid's, Sorley's, (and much of that Scottish literary generation's) indulgence of Sovietism. I concur also with your "post tenebras lux" approach. I was reading this morning Psalm 139 - "If I say, 'Surely the darkness will overwhelm me
And the light around me will be night,'Even the darkness is not dark to You,
And the night is as bright as the day.
Darkness and light are alike to You" (vv11,12)
You mention the verse "He has made everything beautiful in its time". Since like you I view God as absolutely sovereign, I am predisposed to this affirmation. Yet it remains a sword in my heart nonetheless. I have just discovered that the Chinese character for "endure" (忍 rěn) features a knife blade (刃 rèn) over, or in, a heart (心 xīn). To lift a newspaper or glance at a TV bulletin, or visit a children's hospital precludes any simplistic application of these words. If the verse be true at all (as likewise, if God be sovereign at all) it can only be so on a profounder level of apprehension than is the norm. The attempt to endure trauma while professing the sovereignty of God is difficult enough. To call it "beautiful" seems a step too far. As I contemplate the utterly excruciating and hellish horrors so many humans bear and have borne both in peacetime and war I am crushed by the unbearable nightmarish weight of it all. I think the translation of the word must be in question. Or the frame of reference is rarified. Eschatological, perhaps. Something to do with the Cross.
I checked out the original Hebrew for this word "beautiful". It is "yapheh" יפה, which seems to be a standard enough term for "beautiful", but can also shade into "good" and "excellent". Thus the French Louis Segond version has "Il fait toute chose bonne en son temps". Actually, I'm not sure that takes me much further forward. The American Standard Version is a bit easier to get along with. It has "He has made everything appropriate in its time". In the Septuagint, the term used for "beautiful" here is "kalos". This turns out to be the word Christ uses of Himself and of his demise when He says "I am the good (ο καλος) shepherd. The good (ο καλος) shepherd lays down his life for the sheep" (John 10:11).
In Classical Greek "kalos" means "beautiful". Also,"noble","praiseworthy". But most significantly for me, it can also mean"serving a good end or purpose" (Greek-English Lexicon, Liddle, Scott, after Passow).
In Ecclesiastes the Chinese renders the Hebrew "yapheh"with the character for "beautiful" (美 měi) and the character for "good" (好 hǎo) together. In tandem, these characters (美好 měi hǎo) can mean "OK". Maybe that helps just a little bit.n
So where are we? The Greek at least tells us that God has made everything "kalos" in its time, and also that the Shepherd Who is "kalos" lays down His life for the sheep. Thus the death of this Shepherd "serves a good end or purpose". Thus the Cross was supremely yapheh יפה ("beautiful") in its time. And for all time and eternity. Yet who can bear it's horror? Pain is pain.
In Gethsemane ("Oil-Press"), Christ recoiled from the prospect of the pain before Him. Certainly, as I think about it, pain accepted as the careful providence of God ("Thy will be done") can surely be distinguished from the random, blank pain of an atheist universe. The cosmos "groans", being presently subject to "decay/ futility/ meaninglessness" (Rom 8), but the Christian (certainly the Calvinist Christian) affirms in effect that "this (cosmic) sickness is not unto death but to the glory of God, that the Son of God might be glorified by it" (John 11). That is of course a very difficult statement indeed which risks outrage. On the other hand in its impenetrable mystery it rescues from meaninglessness all human misery from the dawn of history to the end of time.
But pain remains pain. Jesus wept sorely at Lazarus' tomb minutes before he commanded Lazarus to walk out of there. The certainty that all was going to be well (or "OK" - 美好 měi hǎo) did not seem to exempt Jesus from the trauma of loss.
So it seems that all these words are being stretched beyond their limits in the attempt to contain a reality which transcends the lexicon (and which I suspect transcends Time itself). Like plastic supermarket bags faced with a snorting Clydesdale horse stood by the checkout counter.
I checked out the original Hebrew for this word "beautiful". It is "yapheh" יפה, which seems to be a standard enough term for "beautiful", but can also shade into "good" and "excellent". Thus the French Louis Segond version has "Il fait toute chose bonne en son temps". Actually, I'm not sure that takes me much further forward. The American Standard Version is a bit easier to get along with. It has "He has made everything appropriate in its time". In the Septuagint, the term used for "beautiful" here is "kalos". This turns out to be the word Christ uses of Himself and of his demise when He says "I am the good (ο καλος) shepherd. The good (ο καλος) shepherd lays down his life for the sheep" (John 10:11).
In Classical Greek "kalos" means "beautiful". Also,"noble","praiseworthy". But most significantly for me, it can also mean"serving a good end or purpose" (Greek-English Lexicon, Liddle, Scott, after Passow).
In Ecclesiastes the Chinese renders the Hebrew "yapheh"with the character for "beautiful" (美 měi) and the character for "good" (好 hǎo) together. In tandem, these characters (美好 měi hǎo) can mean "OK". Maybe that helps just a little bit.n
So where are we? The Greek at least tells us that God has made everything "kalos" in its time, and also that the Shepherd Who is "kalos" lays down His life for the sheep. Thus the death of this Shepherd "serves a good end or purpose". Thus the Cross was supremely yapheh יפה ("beautiful") in its time. And for all time and eternity. Yet who can bear it's horror? Pain is pain.
In Gethsemane ("Oil-Press"), Christ recoiled from the prospect of the pain before Him. Certainly, as I think about it, pain accepted as the careful providence of God ("Thy will be done") can surely be distinguished from the random, blank pain of an atheist universe. The cosmos "groans", being presently subject to "decay/ futility/ meaninglessness" (Rom 8), but the Christian (certainly the Calvinist Christian) affirms in effect that "this (cosmic) sickness is not unto death but to the glory of God, that the Son of God might be glorified by it" (John 11). That is of course a very difficult statement indeed which risks outrage. On the other hand in its impenetrable mystery it rescues from meaninglessness all human misery from the dawn of history to the end of time.
But pain remains pain. Jesus wept sorely at Lazarus' tomb minutes before he commanded Lazarus to walk out of there. The certainty that all was going to be well (or "OK" - 美好 měi hǎo) did not seem to exempt Jesus from the trauma of loss.
So it seems that all these words are being stretched beyond their limits in the attempt to contain a reality which transcends the lexicon (and which I suspect transcends Time itself). Like plastic supermarket bags faced with a snorting Clydesdale horse stood by the checkout counter.
The default outlook of our Western society is secular. The defining context is Godless. The de facto committment is to a neo-Darwinist philosophical materialism. Design is illusion. Life accidental. Death terminal. Purpose strictly DIY. The random Now is all there is. In contrast, the Christian is optimistic about the future, however desolate the present:
"Blessed are those who mourn, For they shall be comforted" (Matthew 5: 4)The Good Shepherd will lead us to a Good Place:
"I consider that our present sufferings are not worth comparing with the glory that will be revealed in us." (Romans 8:18)
"For the Lamb who is in the midst of the throne will shepherd them and lead them to living fountains of waters. And God will wipe away every tear from their eyes.” (Rev 7:17)
Context is everything:
"He has made everything beautiful in its time. Also He has put eternity in their hearts..." (Ecclesiastes 3:11)
Having mulled this over quite a bit, I guess I can only finally cope with that word "beautiful" in eschatalogical terms. In other words for me it ultimately can only refer to suffering reality as entered into and rescued by the Christ on the cross. Suffering (忍 rěn) reality will finally, because of the Cross, have the "knife" (刃 rèn) removed from its "heart" (心 xīn), to be replaced with "eternity" (永 yǒng).
Those latter words from Ecclesiastes ("He has put eternity in their hearts") are central to the philosophy of Herman Dooyeweerd, and he beautifully and classically articulates this Biblical context of suffering here:
Those latter words from Ecclesiastes ("He has put eternity in their hearts") are central to the philosophy of Herman Dooyeweerd, and he beautifully and classically articulates this Biblical context of suffering here:
"Nothing in our apostate world can get lost in Christ. There is not any part of space, there is no temporal life, no temporal movement or temporal energy, no temporal power, wisdom, beauty, love, faith or justice, which sinful reality can maintain as a kind of property of its own apart from Christ.[...] It is all due to God's common grace in Christ that there are still means left in the temporal world to resist the destructive force of the elements that have got loose; that there are still means to combat disease, to check psychiatric maladies, to practise logical thinking, to save cultural development from going down into savage barbarism, to develop language, to preserve the possibility of social interaction, to withstand injustice, and so on. All these things are the fruits of Christ's work, even before His appearance on the earth. From the very beginning God has viewed His fallen creation in the light of the Redeemer." (Herman Dooyeweerd, "A New Critique of Theoretical Thought" Vol II, p 34)
________________________________
2. Zen
2. Zen
You ask (smiling, I imagine) about an apparent "Zen" bias to my Calvinism. Ecclesiastes (and indeed the context of your very quote above) are a reasonable place to begin some kind of explanation -"To everything there is a season, A time for every purpose under heaven: A time to be born, And a time to die; A time to plant, And a time to pluck what is planted; A time to kill, And a time to heal; A time to break down, And a time to build up; A time to weep, And a time to laugh; A time to mourn, And a time to dance; A time to cast away stones, And a time to gather stones; A time to embrace, And a time to refrain from embracing; A time to gain, And a time to lose; A time to keep, And a time to throw away; A time to tear, And a time to sew; A time to keep silence, And a time to speak; A time to love, And a time to hate; A time of war, And a time of peace. What profit has the worker from that in which he labors? I have seen the God-given task with which the sons of men are to be occupied. He has made everything beautiful in its time. Also He has put eternity in their hearts, except that no one can find out the work that God does from beginning to end. I know that nothing is better for them than to rejoice, and to do good in their lives, and also that every man should eat and drink and enjoy the good of all his labor--it is the gift of God. I know that whatever God does, It shall be forever. Nothing can be added to it, And nothing taken from it. (Ecclesiastes 3:1-14, NKJV)Now, it seems to me that, the God-references apart, this passage from Ecclesiates is pretty "Zenish". Indeed, this could be argued for much of Ecclesiastes. There is here in Ecclesiastes the sense that our attitude to the moment-by-moment vicissitudes of our lives should be characterized by equilibrium or equanimity (Latin aequus "even" + animus "mind"). Engagement with, or focus on, the everyday 'here and now' is urged in Zen. Metaphysical speculation and 'overthinking' what might be or what might have been is discouraged in Zen. There is in Zen also an engaging simplicity (rusticity?) and matter-of-factness. Consider in this regard a few anecdotes from the book "Zen Flesh Zen Bones" (Compiled by Paul Reps) -
"A young physician in Tokyo named Kusuda met a college friend who had been studying Zen. The young doctor asked him what Zen was. "I cannot tell you what it is," the friend replied, "But one thing is certain. If you understand Zen, you will not be afraid to die." "That's fine" said Kusuda."I will try it. Where can I find a teacher?" "Go to the master Nan-in," the friend told him. So Kusuda went to call on Nan-in... Nan-in said: "Zen is not a difficult task. If you are a physician, treat your patients with kindness. That is Zen." Kusuda visited Nan-in three times. Each time Nan-in told him the same thing. "A physician should not waste his time around here. Go home and take care of your patients."
* * *"When Banzan was walking through a market he overheard a conversation between a butcher and his customer. "Give me the best piece of meat you have, said the customer." "Everything in my shop is the best." replied the butcher. "You cannot find any piece of meat here that is not the best." At these words Banzan became enlightened.(Compare "Everything is best" with "Everything is beautiful in its time" - F.)
* * *A lord asked Takuan, a Zen teacher, to suggest how he might pass the time. He felt his days very long attending his office and sitting stiffly to receive the homage of others. Takuan wrote eight Chinese characters and gave them to the man -not twice this dayinch time foot gemIn idiomatic English this might read -This day will not come again.Each minute is worth a priceless gem
* * *Ryokan, a Zen master, lived the simplest kind of life in a little hut at the foot of a mountain. One evening a thief visited the hut only to discover there was nothing in it to steal. Ryokan returned and caught him. "You may have come a long way to visit me," he told the prowler, "and you should not return empty-handed. Please take my clothes as a gift. The thief was bewildered. He took the clothes and slunk away. Ryokan sat naked, watching the moon. "Poor fellow," he mused, "I wish I could have given him this beautiful moon."
* * *
This of course brings to mind aspects of Christ's teaching - But I tell you, Do not resist an evil person. If someone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also. And if someone wants to sue you and take your tunic, let him have your cloak as well. If someone forces you to go one mile, go with him two miles. (Matthew 5:39-41)
Then Jesus said to his disciples: "Therefore I tell you, do not worry about your life, what you will eat; or about your body, what you will wear. Life is more than food, and the body more than clothes. Consider the ravens: They do not sow or reap, they have no storeroom or barn; yet God feeds them. And how much more valuable you are than birds! Who of you by worrying can add a single hour to his life? Since you cannot do this very little thing, why do you worry about the rest?
"Consider how the lilies grow. They do not labor or spin. Yet I tell you, not even Solomon in all his splendor was dressed like one of these. If that is how God clothes the grass of the field, which is here today, and tomorrow is thrown into the fire, how much more will he clothe you, O you of little faith! And do not set your heart on what you will eat or drink; do not worry about it. For the pagan world runs after all such things, and your Father knows that you need them." (Luke 12:22-30)
And Paul's -
"For I have learned to be content whatever the circumstances. I know what it is to be in need, and I know what it is to have plenty. I have learned the secret of being content in any and every situation, whether well fed or hungry, whether living in plenty or in want." (Philippians 4:11-12)
"But godliness with contentment is great gain. For we brought nothing into the world, and we can take nothing out of it. But if we have food and clothing, we will be content with that." (1 Timothy 6:6-8)
And Job's responses -
At this, Job got up and tore his robe and shaved his head. Then he fell to the ground in worship and said: "Naked I came from my mother's womb, and naked I will depart. The LORD gave and the LORD has taken away; may the name of the LORD be praised." In all this, Job did not sin by charging God with wrongdoing. (Job 1:20-22)
His wife said to him, "Are you still holding on to your integrity? Curse God and die!" He replied, "You are talking like a foolish woman. Shall we accept good from God, and not trouble?" In all this, Job did not sin in what he said. (Job 2:9,10)
________________________________
3. Detachment
3. Detachment
Some of these Scriptural references are clearly urging on us a detachment from material comforts. A healthy detachment which frees from anxiety. Christians are fairly used to that message, however resistant we are to it in practice. But a closer reading of Paul reveals a profounder message which, like that of Job, cuts much nearer the bone. From the perspective of "spirituality", detachment from luxuries is surely kid's stuff. Detachment from personal deprivation, from personal desolation and disaster - that requires considerably more maturity.
"Shall we accept good from God, and not trouble?" Well, shall we? Shall we say that this "trouble" which befalls us, indeed this harrowing horror, is "beautiful in its time"? Shall we say with Job "The Lord hath given and the Lord hath taken away. Blessed be the name of the Lord"? Are we even close to being able to say with Paul "For I have learned to be content whatever the circumstances"? OK, so now our mind goes to extreme life-shocks - the death of a child, etc. And such events of course are the bottom line for us in the sense that, if we can echo Job at that point then we have surely passed the "trial"-
The challenge faced by Job, and fulfilled by Christ, was to cleave unto God whatever the circumstances. Attachment to God enables commensurate detachment from circumstance. By "detachment from circumstance" we in no way intend a flight from reality, or refusal to face up to unwelcome facts. As you are well aware, there is a pietistic strand of evangelicalism which refrains from participation in society, culture, politics etc, in order, ostensibly, to preserve and cultivate internal sanctity. This, I truly believe, is heretical. It is like an army which digs itself into foxholes and refuses to engage the encroaching enemy, convinced that the only war is the one within their "souls".
So, while Christian detachment is "unto God", it is yet in the midst of circumstance. In other words, we are talking about transcendence over circumstance rather than avoidance of circumstance. The Calvinist emphasis on the sovereignty of God is crucial here. If God's sovereignty were less than absolute, the words "Thy will be done" would be about as meaningful as "Let's just keep our fingers crossed". Let us perhaps re-read that verse from Psalm 66 just quoted, but this time note all the more carefully the ultimate source of events as appealed to by the Psalmist:
As we look in turn at Zen, the question arises, what is Zen detachment "unto"? This is not intended as a cheap question. Zen would no doubt answer with some variation on the theme of "oneness", "nothingness" or some such. Typically, the Christian would dismiss this out of hand as Eastern mumbo-jumbo (detached, sure, but from reality). But a bit more humility might be appropriate. If my personal world is suddenly in ruins, just how much will I the 'Calvinist' continue to trust in the sovereignty of God? Only when it happens will I know. I may be astonished at just how much the Void invades my hitherto "pious" consciousness.
"For you, O God, tested us; you refined us like silver. You brought us into prison and laid burdens on our backs. You let men ride over our heads; we went through fire and water, but you brought us to a place of abundance." (Psalm 66:10-12, NIV)
"Ô Dieu, tu nous as éprouvés, tu nous as passés au creuset comme l'argent, tu nous as mis en difficulté, tu nous as accablés de détresse. Tu as laissé des hommes nous passer à cheval sur la tête, nous avons dû traverser le feu et l'eau. Mais tu nous as tirés de là et soulagés." (Psaume 66:10-12, en français courant)However, although we are told that "In all this, Job did not sin in what he said", it is important to observe - it is surely a deliverance to observe - that he was far from impassive. In fact many chapters of the Book of Job are sustained expressions of bitter complaint, crippling bewilderment, and abysmal despair. This man was no Stoic. Nor was Christ Himself. His mental agony in Gethsemane, His public grief at Lazarus's tomb, we have already alluded to. His anger and His humour are also apparent in the Gospels.
The challenge faced by Job, and fulfilled by Christ, was to cleave unto God whatever the circumstances. Attachment to God enables commensurate detachment from circumstance. By "detachment from circumstance" we in no way intend a flight from reality, or refusal to face up to unwelcome facts. As you are well aware, there is a pietistic strand of evangelicalism which refrains from participation in society, culture, politics etc, in order, ostensibly, to preserve and cultivate internal sanctity. This, I truly believe, is heretical. It is like an army which digs itself into foxholes and refuses to engage the encroaching enemy, convinced that the only war is the one within their "souls".
So, while Christian detachment is "unto God", it is yet in the midst of circumstance. In other words, we are talking about transcendence over circumstance rather than avoidance of circumstance. The Calvinist emphasis on the sovereignty of God is crucial here. If God's sovereignty were less than absolute, the words "Thy will be done" would be about as meaningful as "Let's just keep our fingers crossed". Let us perhaps re-read that verse from Psalm 66 just quoted, but this time note all the more carefully the ultimate source of events as appealed to by the Psalmist:
"For you, O God, tested us; you refined us like silver. You brought us into prison and laid burdens on our backs. You let men ride over our heads; we went through fire and water, but you brought us to a place of abundance." (Psalm 66:10-12, NIV)An all-swallowing swamp shrouded in noxious fog. That's what Job's stable, comfortable world had become. Almost overnight. His very body decaying like putrid timber. He clung, as if hung by a nail, to that single broken branch above him.
As we look in turn at Zen, the question arises, what is Zen detachment "unto"? This is not intended as a cheap question. Zen would no doubt answer with some variation on the theme of "oneness", "nothingness" or some such. Typically, the Christian would dismiss this out of hand as Eastern mumbo-jumbo (detached, sure, but from reality). But a bit more humility might be appropriate. If my personal world is suddenly in ruins, just how much will I the 'Calvinist' continue to trust in the sovereignty of God? Only when it happens will I know. I may be astonished at just how much the Void invades my hitherto "pious" consciousness.
However Zen articulates the matter, its focus on the existence of a transcendent equilibrium beyond circumstance is surely accurate in principle. Calvinism, for its part, would insist that there is no basis for such "transcendent equilibrium" other than the character and sovereign kindness of the Living God. Indeed faith in, and obedience to, God are made prerequisites, as we see if we trace the Biblical use of the word "rest". It first appears in Genesis 8. Noah sends out a dove from the ark to see if the flood-waters have abated -"But the dove found no rest (מנוח manowach) for the sole of her foot". The Septuagint generally translates this term with "κατάπαυσις (katapausis)", which also carries the connotation of "calming of the winds", or simply "calm". These two Hebrew and Greek terms turn up in the following passage in the New Testament (and we note in passing the zen-like emphasis on "Today" - ie "Here and Now"):
"So God’s rest is there for people to enter, but those who first heard this good news failed to enter because they disobeyed God. So God set another time for entering his rest, and that time is today. God announced this through David much later in the words already quoted: 'Today when you hear his voice, don’t harden your hearts.'” (Hebrews 4:6-11, New Living Translation)So whether we face flood or storm, we yet endeavour to find rest (ie God's equilibrium) for the sole of our foot:
God is our refuge and strength, A very present help in trouble. Therefore we will not fear, Even though the earth be removed, And though the mountains be carried into the midst of the sea; Though its waters roar and be troubled, Though the mountains shake with its swelling. Selah
Be still, and know that I am God; I will be exalted among the nations, I will be exalted in the earth! (Psalm 46:1-3,10 NKJV)
Isaiah tells us:
In returning and rest you shall be saved; In quietness and confidence shall be your strength; but you would have none of it. (Isaiah 30:15)
A French version of the above verse superbly brings out its relevance to our discussion:
Vous ne serez sauvés qu'en revenant à moi et en restant tranquilles. Votre seul force, c'est de garder votre calme et de me faire confiance.
(You will be saved only in returning to me and in remaining tranquil. Your only strength is to guard your calm and to have confidence in me) (Esaie 30:15 en français courant)
And Christ Himself says to us (in those words which drew me to Him at the first):
As with Ecclesiastes - "A time for war, And a time for peace...". As with Paul - "I have learned the secret of being content in any and every situation". As with Job - "Shall we accept good from God, and not trouble?"
Stressless within the stress of everyday life - is this a Biblically generated and informed aspiration, or is it just imposing on the Bible the contemporary preoccupation with psychological self-management? Perhaps our judgement gets skewed by a pietistic (gnostic-inspired) mindset which partitions life into "sacred" and "secular", or "spiritual" and "physical" categories, with the Bible and God only relevant to the so-called "spiritual" compartment - where reside (from this viewpoint) the matter of sin and deliverance therefrom.
I observe that, for me as a teacher, a practiced attitude of calm (on those occasions when I get close to it!) saves me from an anger which can so often lead into speech and behaviour which I later regret. In other words, the conscious fostering of "serenity" (inner "rest"/ "calm"/ "equilibrium"/ "equanimity") will clearly impact on our self-control - which, let us remember, is a fruit of the Spirit (Galations 5:23).
Christ tells us that "men will have to give account on the day of judgement for every careless word they have spoken" (Matt 12:36). Is self-control an instance of "psychological self-management"? A factor in one's attitude to alcohol is of course its possible impairment of self-control. Intake is avoided or regulated largely with self-control in mind. The pietist should at least be settled by the thought that "self-control" is a sin-avoidance skill.
There are stress-triggered malaises, and serious pathological conditions, where medication enables the patient to better "manage" their thoughts, words and behaviour. Is medication scriptural? Of course it is. So are there not also in Scripture therapeutic and preventative strategies to help us manage stress, optimize self-control and minimize the need for medication? Surely there are, even if our evangelical tradition may not have been too helpful in identifying them to us. That tradition is more liable to have presented us with a split-level life - i.e the Bible for "spiritual" problems and medicine for "physical" problems.
Come to me all you who are weary and heavy-laden, and I will give you rest... (Matt 11:28).And these remarkable words which signal some kind of transcendent counterpoise between rest and unrest:
I have told you these things, so that in me you may have peace. In this world you will have trouble. But take heart! I have overcome the world. (John 16:33)But in envisaging (as in the case of Job) only extreme circumstances when we ponder these matters, we can overlook the relevance of these Scriptures for our everyday stresses at work, domestically, and so on. Before us here in Scripture is modelled a predisposition we should obviously aspire to in our daily "walk" - namely, a detachment from (or "equanimity" concerning) both "luxury" and "deprivation". Detachment - to take a mundane example familiar to many of us - from a chronic corrosive preoccupation with the anticipated "luxury" of reaching the end of the "deprivation" (or "grind") imposed on us by the working day or week.
As with Ecclesiastes - "A time for war, And a time for peace...". As with Paul - "I have learned the secret of being content in any and every situation". As with Job - "Shall we accept good from God, and not trouble?"
Stressless within the stress of everyday life - is this a Biblically generated and informed aspiration, or is it just imposing on the Bible the contemporary preoccupation with psychological self-management? Perhaps our judgement gets skewed by a pietistic (gnostic-inspired) mindset which partitions life into "sacred" and "secular", or "spiritual" and "physical" categories, with the Bible and God only relevant to the so-called "spiritual" compartment - where reside (from this viewpoint) the matter of sin and deliverance therefrom.
I observe that, for me as a teacher, a practiced attitude of calm (on those occasions when I get close to it!) saves me from an anger which can so often lead into speech and behaviour which I later regret. In other words, the conscious fostering of "serenity" (inner "rest"/ "calm"/ "equilibrium"/ "equanimity") will clearly impact on our self-control - which, let us remember, is a fruit of the Spirit (Galations 5:23).
Christ tells us that "men will have to give account on the day of judgement for every careless word they have spoken" (Matt 12:36). Is self-control an instance of "psychological self-management"? A factor in one's attitude to alcohol is of course its possible impairment of self-control. Intake is avoided or regulated largely with self-control in mind. The pietist should at least be settled by the thought that "self-control" is a sin-avoidance skill.
There are stress-triggered malaises, and serious pathological conditions, where medication enables the patient to better "manage" their thoughts, words and behaviour. Is medication scriptural? Of course it is. So are there not also in Scripture therapeutic and preventative strategies to help us manage stress, optimize self-control and minimize the need for medication? Surely there are, even if our evangelical tradition may not have been too helpful in identifying them to us. That tradition is more liable to have presented us with a split-level life - i.e the Bible for "spiritual" problems and medicine for "physical" problems.
___________________________
4. Praxis
4. Praxis
Our society is well aware of the need for daily physical exercise to maintain effective athletic, or even good "everyday", performance. However, we as a western society (and in some forms of evangelical society not least) can be rather skeptical of any kind of daily consciousness-type exercise to optimize performance. Obviously, the Christian will tend to ask if prayer and Bible-study does not adequately provide just such a "limbering" or "conditioning" (in the healing sense) of the personality. Well, the answer is probably kind of "Yes" and "No". It is, again, a pietistic notion and pitfall that mere reading of the Bible, (or praying, indeed) will bestow automatic spiritual benefit. We don't get that idea from Christ. Neither do we get it, for example, from James who of course tells us in his inimitable blunt style to be "doers of the Word and not hearers only". Or as the NIV has it:
"Do not merely listen to the word, and so deceive yourselves. Do what it says. Anyone who listens to the word but does not do what it says is like a man who looks at his face in a mirror, and, after looking at himself, goes away and immediately forgets what he looks like. But the man who looks intently into the perfect law that gives freedom, and continues to do this, not forgetting what he has heard, but doing it - he will be blessed in what he does." (James 1:22-25)And just by-the-by, it is interesting that the following verses mention the matter of speech and self-control -
"If anyone considers himself religious and yet does not keep a tight rein on his tongue, he deceives himself and his religion is worthless" (James 1:26). He picks up this theme again in chapter 3 - "We all stumble in many ways. If anyone is never at fault in what he says, he is a perfect man, able to keep his whole body in check. When we put bits into the mouths of horses to make them obey us, we can turn the whole animal. Or take ships as an example. Although they are so large and are driven by strong winds, they are steered by a very small rudder wherever the pilot wants to go. Likewise the tongue is a small part of the body... All kinds of animals...have been tamed by man, but no man can tame the tongue" (James 3:2-8).So then, a glance in the mirror maketh us pretty not! We must pick up the face-cloth and comb and attend to our appearance. We must act. On a daily, routine basis. Grime sullies our face. Stress sullies and disfigures our thoughts, our behaviour, our speech. Are there daily routines we can look to? Are there stress-reducing approaches which are at all explicit in the Bible? Psalm 1 gives us one answer. It is Zen-like in its call for daily meditation, but distinctly un-Zen in its emphasis on Book, Law and Word. The latter is at variance with Zen in emphasizing verbal truth. For Zen (at least in its "universal one-ness" guise), words are obfuscation and distraction, and words pretending to metaphysical content are most suspect -
"The wind is soft, the moon is serene.Calmly I read the True Word of no letters" (Zenkei Shibayama, A Flower Does Not Talk: Zen Essays )
Ray Grigg quotes the foregoing in his very interesting book 'The Tao of Zen', but later adds -
"A commonly held misimpression of both Taoism and Zen is that they reject the use of words. They use words but they clearly understand the effects and the limits of them....The challenge, of course is to use words and not use words, and never to mistake the word for the thing. Philosophers in Chinese history became aware of the distinction between the reality of direct experience and the fiction created by the metaphorical spell of words. Their insight had a parallel in the Greek logic of Zeno's paradox, in which a runner who continues to cover half the remaining distance to a destination will never arrive...'One can in fact say things that sound right, but mean nothing at all'"(Ray Grigg, The Tao of Zen, Charles E. Tuttle Co., Inc, 1994)
"And it is human nature to use words. Denying them is like denying walking or eating or loving. The trick is to use words without creating a metaphysical construct that takes on a life of its own. Both the Taoist and Zen traditions have an oral and written literature. But the wisdom their sages offer rests on the understanding that the choice cannot be between words or silence; it can only be both words and silence. Indeed a silent wordlessness would become an absolute, merely another metaphysic." (Ibid, p 197)
"'Words are the fog one has to see through,' as one saying puts it." (Ibid, p 194)
Words, of course, differentiate aspects of reality, specify that "this" is not "that", and that "now" is not "then". The one-ness of Zen comes from transcending all differentiation, all specification, all paradox. Words distract from the physical "now", leading to abstract speculation which, for Zen, is inherently futile and delusive. Thus the question of a Zen initiate may well be answered not with words, but with a sharp slap or kick, to jolt him with a shock back into the realization (enlightenment) that the physical here and now is all the Truth there is. Zen is praxis.
The Christian relationship to words is fundamentally different, though there are surprising correspondences also. One correspondence is apparent in the letter of James already referred to above. James puts great weight on action rather than words as an index of an authentic grasp of the Truth. Then we think at once of passages such as: "Not everyone who says to me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven" (Matthew 7:21).
Some sense of the degree to which the Buddhist may feel comfortable with James is evident in the following excerpt from a book review by Amos Yong (Regent University School of Divinity, Virginia, USA) in the Japanese Journal of Religious Studies 34/2 (2007). The review is of "The Wisdom of James: Parallels with Mahāyāna Buddhism" by John P. Keenan -
The Christian relationship to words is fundamentally different, though there are surprising correspondences also. One correspondence is apparent in the letter of James already referred to above. James puts great weight on action rather than words as an index of an authentic grasp of the Truth. Then we think at once of passages such as: "Not everyone who says to me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven" (Matthew 7:21).
Some sense of the degree to which the Buddhist may feel comfortable with James is evident in the following excerpt from a book review by Amos Yong (Regent University School of Divinity, Virginia, USA) in the Japanese Journal of Religious Studies 34/2 (2007). The review is of "The Wisdom of James: Parallels with Mahāyāna Buddhism" by John P. Keenan -
This Mahāyāna reading of James unsurprisingly culminates at one place (among others) in the discourse on teaching and the untamed tongue in the middle of the epistle (3:1–12). From the Mahāyāna perspective, the problem of the tongue is neither merely its capacity for abuse nor only the possibility of false teachings, even if both are matters of concern. Rather, the problem more simply put is that verbal constructs emanate from the tongue. Insofar as discursive and prejudicial discrimination is dependent on words, to that same extent James’ concern can be understood with teaching itself as “an act of language-formed delusion” (p. 217 n4). Keenan thus suggests the virtue of one of the main heroes in the epistle, Job, is the exemplary silence that characterizes his faith (pp. 159–63; cp. 5:11–12 and Job 42:1–6).
This understanding of Job dovetails not only with the broader observation, perennially noted by James interpreters, that the letter is devoid of doctrinal claims, but also with the fact that “James never identifies any conceptual content for the wisdom God gives” (p. 40).
All of this is in line with the Mahāyāna tendency to subordinate conventionally articulated doctrinal teaching, because of its emptiness, to practical wisdom. But the Mahāyāna teachers themselves recognized emptiness is neither an end in itself nor to be grasped as such, since this would be to reify an abstraction. Hence recognition of the emptiness of conventional language leads the sage beyond speech to the embodiment of practical wisdom that is capable of transforming the world. Similarly, with James, “It is not that one should not think, but that one should not think within the framework of friendship with the world [cp. 2:23, 3:13–18, 4:4], within the measure of the world, where distinctions between rich and poor are very important, where the classes of society are almost metaphysical entities” (p. 138).
On Keenan’s reading, then, the letter of James emphasizes “an operative wisdom that discerns needs and responds compassionately” (p. 119). In this framework, the goal of teaching is not discriminatory knowledge (of the world’s) but rather an understanding that leads to merciful compassion. But could we not also see the Mahāyāna tradition in light of James such that, if James is divinely revelatory, then the letter itself judges human thoughts and actions?
If God is the ultimate judge, as Keenan rightly refuses to interpret away, then the insistence that James writes in the wisdom tradition of Torah interpretation and practice suggests it should be read as a prophetic tract through which divine imperatives and judgment appear with illocutionary force. In this case, a more dialectical and dialogical relationship between the New Testament and Mahāyāna Buddhism would see mutual illumination and transformation: the text of James is opened up through the Mahāyāna hermeneutic on the one hand, even as Mahāyāna discourse is itself called to accountability before the ultimate law and judgment of God on the other.
(John P. Keenan, The Wisdom of James: Parallels with Mahāyāna Buddhism, New York and Mahwah, NJ: The Newman Press, 2005)
And a thoughtful Calvinist is unlikely to have too much problem with the following sentiments of Lu K’uan Yu (Charles Luk) (1898-1978) -
"As long as people are beguiled by words, they can never expect to penetrate to the heart of Zen. Why? Because words are merely a vehicle on which the truth is carried. Not understanding the meaning of the old masters and their koans, people try to find it in the words only, but they will find nothing there to lay their hands on. The truth itself is beyond all description, but it is by words that the truth is manifested. Let us, then, forget the words when we gain the truth itself. This is done only when we have an insight through experience into that which is indicated by the words."
For all the "truth-beyond-words" tenor of that last quote, it is significant that in the midst of it Lu K’uan Yu states that "words are merely a vehicle on which the truth is carried" and "it is by words that the truth is manifested". This is a necessary clarification by him, since any unqualified assertion that "the truth cannot be put into words" would be patently self-contradictory, and turn Lu K’uan Yu's very act of writing into a futile, even counter-productive, exercise. Of course, the anti-word koans are also comprised of words. So though Zen takes great pains to point beyond words, it is in practice not absolutist in this regard, recognizing the degree to which silence can be misconstrued even more than words.
I would say, nonetheless, that the Christian worldview, while also being wary of the deluding potential of words ("for the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life" 2 Cor 3:6), is far less equivocal about endorsing words as viable vehicles of truth. Darwinian dogma would of course have words appearing far down the line (or up the tree?) of human evolution. For Darwinism words are refined grunts, with no transcendent reference - no 'lexicon' or 'grammar' in the heavens to arbitrate meaning. But the Bible has God walking and conversing with Adam "in the cool of the day" and explaining to him the purpose of his life. Words are thus 'grounded' in God, and humans (made in His image) had verbal revelation from God from the outset.
The Bible tells us that the Logos created the cosmos and sustains it by His "word of power" (Heb 1:3). And here we have another unlikely correspondence. Zen of course warns against peering at the finger instead of at the moon to which the finger points. Christians would concur in that sense, but also recognize that words per se also point to the Word. And the Moon itself points to the Word (the Logos) - to Him Who commanded "Let there be light!".
Compare this with Psalm 89:36,37 - "His throne is as secure as the sun, as eternal as the moon, my faithful witness in the sky!". One French translation renders this charmingly - "Tant que la lune sera là, fidèle témoin, derrière les nuages" (en français courant).
For the Calvinist, Christ the Word, the Logos, is not a metaphysical speculation. He is concrete reality. Indeed, as God, He is the only absolute concrete reality. All else derives its meaning from Him, is an echo of Him, is a shadow, a type, a referent of Him.
Cornelius Van Til insists we must think concretely. "Truth", "Beauty", "Justice", "Logic", for example, are not simply human concepts. Yet neither do they have "out-there" self-existence (see also Dooyeweerd below). They are in fact modes of meaning sourced in God. Thus they are not, as Darwinists in their fundamentalist materialism would have it, "emergent properties" of reconstituted stardust called "Man".
Likewise, language is not "accidental". It is not, as it were, the cosmic wind soughing from the Void. Rather, linguistic meaning derives from God. Herman Dooyeweerd [see Friesen site / Basden site], in fact posits a "Linguistic" or "Lingual" modality as an irreducible aspect to reality. Our preceding observation that even Zen cannot entirely discount words would seem to add support to the tenability of this.
Interestingly, the first satanic act in Scripture was the murder of words (logocide?) - "Hath God said?" (Gen 3:1) (cf John 8: 43-47). Ultimately, words have currency because the Creator has used words to communicate truth. (For an extended consideration of the issue of the plurality of languages from a Biblical point of view please refer to the article "Creative Tensions:Personal Reflections of an Evangelical Christian and Gaelic Poet" [PDF]). There is also available an interesting analysis of the influence of the Christian worldview on early Chinese writing in a pdf file called "The Lamb of God hidden in the Ancient Chinese Characters".
Now, to return to Psalm 1. This psalm without doubt counsels us to think on Scripture often, and at least daily (and nightly!). But we see from James that Scripture does not teach that we should do nothing else but read Scripture (ie spend our lives simply staring in the "mirror"). Christ Himself did not give us such an example. Scripture teaches that we should rescue and rebuild the Earth to the glory of God. To pick up again on that Zen "finger and moon" image and modify it slightly (with the Scripture as "finger"), we might say that James warns us against "peering at the finger rather than at the Earth to which the finger (of Scripture) points" (Gen 1:28, Matt 28: 18-20, Mark 16:15, Acts 1: 8).
The Mirror (the Pointing Finger) is indispensible. But James is reminding us that true piety does more than stare at Scripture. True piety acts on it. So, I suggest that Scripture allows that our mind may be employed in various modes, all of which should be compatible with "meditating on His law day and night". My Hebrew is elementary indeed, but I note with interest how this verse (Psalm 1:2) seems structured so that our eye jumps back from "בְתֹורָתֹו יֶהְגֶּה" ("law meditate") to "בְּתֹורַת יְהוָה" ("law of the LORD"). Thus calling our musings away from any detached abstraction and back into the presence of the One Who Lives.
I would say, nonetheless, that the Christian worldview, while also being wary of the deluding potential of words ("for the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life" 2 Cor 3:6), is far less equivocal about endorsing words as viable vehicles of truth. Darwinian dogma would of course have words appearing far down the line (or up the tree?) of human evolution. For Darwinism words are refined grunts, with no transcendent reference - no 'lexicon' or 'grammar' in the heavens to arbitrate meaning. But the Bible has God walking and conversing with Adam "in the cool of the day" and explaining to him the purpose of his life. Words are thus 'grounded' in God, and humans (made in His image) had verbal revelation from God from the outset.
The Bible tells us that the Logos created the cosmos and sustains it by His "word of power" (Heb 1:3). And here we have another unlikely correspondence. Zen of course warns against peering at the finger instead of at the moon to which the finger points. Christians would concur in that sense, but also recognize that words per se also point to the Word. And the Moon itself points to the Word (the Logos) - to Him Who commanded "Let there be light!".
Compare this with Psalm 89:36,37 - "His throne is as secure as the sun, as eternal as the moon, my faithful witness in the sky!". One French translation renders this charmingly - "Tant que la lune sera là, fidèle témoin, derrière les nuages" (en français courant).
For the Calvinist, Christ the Word, the Logos, is not a metaphysical speculation. He is concrete reality. Indeed, as God, He is the only absolute concrete reality. All else derives its meaning from Him, is an echo of Him, is a shadow, a type, a referent of Him.
Cornelius Van Til insists we must think concretely. "Truth", "Beauty", "Justice", "Logic", for example, are not simply human concepts. Yet neither do they have "out-there" self-existence (see also Dooyeweerd below). They are in fact modes of meaning sourced in God. Thus they are not, as Darwinists in their fundamentalist materialism would have it, "emergent properties" of reconstituted stardust called "Man".
Likewise, language is not "accidental". It is not, as it were, the cosmic wind soughing from the Void. Rather, linguistic meaning derives from God. Herman Dooyeweerd [see Friesen site / Basden site], in fact posits a "Linguistic" or "Lingual" modality as an irreducible aspect to reality. Our preceding observation that even Zen cannot entirely discount words would seem to add support to the tenability of this.
Interestingly, the first satanic act in Scripture was the murder of words (logocide?) - "Hath God said?" (Gen 3:1) (cf John 8: 43-47). Ultimately, words have currency because the Creator has used words to communicate truth. (For an extended consideration of the issue of the plurality of languages from a Biblical point of view please refer to the article "Creative Tensions:Personal Reflections of an Evangelical Christian and Gaelic Poet" [PDF]). There is also available an interesting analysis of the influence of the Christian worldview on early Chinese writing in a pdf file called "The Lamb of God hidden in the Ancient Chinese Characters".
Now, to return to Psalm 1. This psalm without doubt counsels us to think on Scripture often, and at least daily (and nightly!). But we see from James that Scripture does not teach that we should do nothing else but read Scripture (ie spend our lives simply staring in the "mirror"). Christ Himself did not give us such an example. Scripture teaches that we should rescue and rebuild the Earth to the glory of God. To pick up again on that Zen "finger and moon" image and modify it slightly (with the Scripture as "finger"), we might say that James warns us against "peering at the finger rather than at the Earth to which the finger (of Scripture) points" (Gen 1:28, Matt 28: 18-20, Mark 16:15, Acts 1: 8).
The Mirror (the Pointing Finger) is indispensible. But James is reminding us that true piety does more than stare at Scripture. True piety acts on it. So, I suggest that Scripture allows that our mind may be employed in various modes, all of which should be compatible with "meditating on His law day and night". My Hebrew is elementary indeed, but I note with interest how this verse (Psalm 1:2) seems structured so that our eye jumps back from "בְתֹורָתֹו יֶהְגֶּה" ("law meditate") to "בְּתֹורַת יְהוָה" ("law of the LORD"). Thus calling our musings away from any detached abstraction and back into the presence of the One Who Lives.
________________________________
5. Nature
5. Nature
Grass and trees have the buddha nature. They are not different from me. If I could just be like the grass and the trees, I'd find the Way in no time. Men nowadays won't go the Way: point it out, and they curse it. A wounded sigh for these folks: paupers gone begging on a mountain of gold. "Hymn on the Way" by Zen master Guan Xiu (Kuan Hsiu), 832 - 912. Translated by J.P. Seaton. The Literary ReviewInterestingly, Christ's advice for escaping the stress of worry is to ponder nature - "Consider the ravens", "Consider how the lilies grow". Here again, though, we tend to skim these verses rather than plumb them. We perhaps treat the mention of "ravens" and "lilies" as no more than a couple of random nods in the direction of nature. As a memorandum that some time in the garden, or the odd "constitutional" walk in the park or country, can help soothe the troubled brow. We can surely venture deeper than this, though. Consider the ravens. They don't worry about tomorrow. Indeed, even less (one assumes) do they regret yesterday. Like all animals, they live in the "here and now". The lily is even less speculative. It waves its leaves about rather more slowly than the raven flaps its wings. I don't imagine for a moment that Christ was suggesting that we should not prepare for the future nor seek to mend the past. Or that we should habitually move like sloths. But I do imagine that when He gives advice, that advice is worth the deepest scrutiny. Is Christ signalling "gear-changes" in thought here which are available to humans, and that we could beneficially practice?
(cf "A time to cast away stones, And a time to gather stones... A time to keep silence, And a time to speak... A time of war, And a time of peace" ).
Different gears suit different driving conditions. Sometimes neutral is the appropriate position for the gear-stick. Revving in frustration at yet another red light may not be kind on the engine. Here is Christ's advice for coping with everyday stress - consider the (gear of?) ravens (cf Dooyeweerd's "sensitive"sphere (F/B), the realm of feeling/sentience/emotion, mentioned below). Consider the (gear of?) lilies (cf "biotic" sphere (F/B). This is not really so off the wall as it sounds at first. To sit and pat a pet dog, or stroke a cat, or talk to a budgie, involves rapport with the animal. Identification with the thought processes of the animal. Being on the animal's "wavelength". This practice is known to be de-stressing for the human. Tending house-plants likewise involves a therapeutic affinity with the plant. A focused attentiveness to the state of the plant. Zen of course also frequently alludes to rock and water (cf Dooyeweerd's "physical" sphere). Which of us has not done the equivalent of picking up a pebble from the beach or the river, and watching it change colour as it dried? This kind of practice goes on daily with no hangups over mystical baggage. People instinctively realize the benefits. It is just a short step to suggesting that perhaps to deliberately sit and gaze, mind in neutral (or "at ease", to use a military metaphor), at a house-plant (or office-plant) for a minute or two daily might help balance and condition our mental state. If we are stuck in the car at traffic lights when we are in a desperate hurry, can we learn to gaze for the duration at, for instance, that tree over there or that seagull wheeling overhead, slipping our mind (as well as the car) into calm neutral instead of "seeing red"?
We are supposed to be taking "every thought captive to obey Christ" (2 Cor 10:5) We are told that:
"Thou dost keep him in perfect peace whose mind is stayed on Thee" Isaiah 26:3
(The Amplified Version renders this:
"You will guard him and keep him in perfect and constant peace whose mind [both its inclination and its character] is stayed on You, because he commits himself to You, leans on You, and hopes confidently in You").
Here are a couple more verses in this vein -
"I saw the Lord always before me. He is at my right hand, that I should not be moved." (Psalm 16:8)
"This is the day that the Lord hath made. Let us rejoice and be glad in it." (Psalm 118:24)
This is the hour that the Lord hath made. This is the minute that the Lord hath made...This is the red light that the Lord hath made!
Inner equilibrium. Founded on the sovereign Lord, the Living God.
Inner equilibrium. Founded on the sovereign Lord, the Living God.
After the execution of John the Baptist, Christ seeks out physical and mental (de-stressing) space for Himself and the disciples –
The apostles gathered around Jesus and reported to him all they had done and taught. Then, because so many people were coming and going that they did not even have a chance to eat, he said to them, "Come with me by yourselves to a quiet place and get some rest." ... So they went away by themselves in a boat to a solitary place . (Mark 6:30-32)
A stressed person feels overwhelmed by circumstance. The problem is "in his/her face". In martial arts a central tenet is to nurture an inner equilibrium whatever the onslaught faced. The loss of that calm inner space is potentially fatal. Western pugilistics often seem more taken-up with an "external" "mechanical" power-struggle.
The "spatial" happens to be the second of Dooyeweerd's spheres, after the "numerical/quantative". Zen-based oriental art is highly aware of empty space. It is evident in ikebana, traditional Japanese flower-arrangement, for example. Each stem, leaf and blossom is allowed room to breathe and "speak". The single lily is more "consider"-able than a dense bouquet. The lily, like any other plant or tree, needs space to grow. Consider it. The sky above the earth speaks of space. Is space. The ravens fly in it. Without it they could not fly. There is a phenomenal amount of space out there. The galaxies spin in it. When we gaze up at night we can be awed by it. Calmed by it. Deep calls to deep in it. There seems to be a profound fundamental sense in which our thoughts as human beings are made possible (only?) by reference to the natural cosmos. The space of "Space" is analogous of our mental space. Are not our heads like unto planetariums? There is plenty of room - a universe of room - within our skulls, but we rarely glimpse that exhilarating fact.
As humans, we seem to need acquaintance with Nature to allow us to think at all. Our minds internalize our encounters with Nature and that engagement enables our thought. To again point out the demerits of pietism - if Christians did literally nothing but read the Bible, they could not understand the Bible, which ceaselessly refers to the world. The Bible therefore requires of its readers some degree of personal experience of living in the world, and living in the world is thus Biblically endorsed. The Bible is not pietistic. The parables of Christ also presuppose that his hearers have world-immersed lives. All God's revelation to us is anthropomorphic (cosmomorphic?). We can in fact comprehend nothing else. Christ as the True Man is Prophet, Priest and King of the Cosmos. The human mind (analogous of His Mind) functions as an interpretative matrix of the cosmos. The galaxies and supernovae, the terrestrial clouds, waters, mountains, flora and fauna somehow form the deep structures of our thought, the syntax of our wordless internal language. I have coincidentally just come across an apposite quote from Dogen, 1200-1253, Japanese founder of Soto-Zen:
The "spatial" happens to be the second of Dooyeweerd's spheres, after the "numerical/quantative". Zen-based oriental art is highly aware of empty space. It is evident in ikebana, traditional Japanese flower-arrangement, for example. Each stem, leaf and blossom is allowed room to breathe and "speak". The single lily is more "consider"-able than a dense bouquet. The lily, like any other plant or tree, needs space to grow. Consider it. The sky above the earth speaks of space. Is space. The ravens fly in it. Without it they could not fly. There is a phenomenal amount of space out there. The galaxies spin in it. When we gaze up at night we can be awed by it. Calmed by it. Deep calls to deep in it. There seems to be a profound fundamental sense in which our thoughts as human beings are made possible (only?) by reference to the natural cosmos. The space of "Space" is analogous of our mental space. Are not our heads like unto planetariums? There is plenty of room - a universe of room - within our skulls, but we rarely glimpse that exhilarating fact.
As humans, we seem to need acquaintance with Nature to allow us to think at all. Our minds internalize our encounters with Nature and that engagement enables our thought. To again point out the demerits of pietism - if Christians did literally nothing but read the Bible, they could not understand the Bible, which ceaselessly refers to the world. The Bible therefore requires of its readers some degree of personal experience of living in the world, and living in the world is thus Biblically endorsed. The Bible is not pietistic. The parables of Christ also presuppose that his hearers have world-immersed lives. All God's revelation to us is anthropomorphic (cosmomorphic?). We can in fact comprehend nothing else. Christ as the True Man is Prophet, Priest and King of the Cosmos. The human mind (analogous of His Mind) functions as an interpretative matrix of the cosmos. The galaxies and supernovae, the terrestrial clouds, waters, mountains, flora and fauna somehow form the deep structures of our thought, the syntax of our wordless internal language. I have coincidentally just come across an apposite quote from Dogen, 1200-1253, Japanese founder of Soto-Zen:
"I came to realize that mind is no other than mountains and rivers and the great wide earth, the sun and the moon and the stars."
Each plant, creature, rock, somehow informs (in-forms) and expresses (ex-presses) our thought. It is more than symbol and representation. It is far more literal (concretely actual) than that. To be human is to live and articulate, physically and thought-fully, in this medium. And the Christian has glimpsed that this "medium", (like that "Rock") is, in some real sense, "Christ". All bushes burn with Him and all ground is holy with Him. I am not at all talking the evolutionist pantheist language of a Teilhard de Chardin here. Nor suggesting any kind of pantheism. The Creation is not Christ in a pantheist sense. I am merely reiterating what Paul says in Romans 11:36, that
"From him and through him and to him are all things. To him be the glory forever! Amen".
That Christ is the meaning of all things. That He is the meaning of the heavens and the earth and all that in them is. That nothing exists which is not ultimately about Him. That the earth is
"full of the knowledge of the Lord, as the waters cover the sea"(Isaiah 11:9).
When you think about it, that Rock which accompanied Israel through the wilderness (1 Cor 10:4) was the True Promised Land, rather than Canaan. Christ is our Homeland too. Christ is our Universe. We are made in His image. In the new heavens and the new earth all that "is" shall explicitly refer to Him and extol Him (indeed it does so explicitly now also, but men "suppress the truth in unrighteousness" Romans 1:18). Let us consider (if we can get past the old-fashioned translation) the following pertininent - indeed remarkable - words of Calvin (a man unlikely to be accused of pantheism!):
Since the infinite wisdom of God is displayed in the admirable structure of heaven and earth, it is absolutely impossible to unfold The History of the Creation of the World in terms equal to its dignity. For while the measure of our capacity is too contracted to comprehend things of such magnitude, our tongue is equally incapable of giving a full and substantial account of them. As he, however, deserves praise, who, with modesty and reverence, applies himself to the consideration of the works of God, although he attain less than might be wished, so, if in this kind of employment, I endeavour to assist others according to the ability given to me, I trust that my service will be not less approved by pious men than accepted by God. I have chosen to premise this, for the sake not only of excusing myself, but of admonishing my readers, that if they sincerely wish to profit with me in meditating on the works of God, they must bring with them a sober, docile, mild, and humble spirit. We see, indeed, the world with our eyes, we tread the earth with our feet, we touch innumerable kinds of God's works with our hands, we inhale a sweet and pleasant fragrance from herbs and flowers, we enjoy boundless benefits; but in those very things of which we attain some knowledge, there dwells such an immensity of divine power, goodness, and wisdom, as absorbs all our senses. Therefore, let men be satisfied if they obtain only a moderate taste of them, suited to their capacity. And it becomes us so to press towards this mark during our whole life, that (even in extreme old age) we shall not repent of the progress we have made, if only we have advanced ever so little in our course...
I now return to the design of Moses, or rather of the Holy Spirit, who has spoken by his mouth. We know God, who is himself invisible, only through his works. Therefore, the Apostle elegantly styles the worlds, "ta me ek fainomenoon blepomena", as if one should say, "the manifestation of things not apparent," (Heb. 11: 3). This is the reason why the Lord, that he may invite us to the knowledge of himself, places the fabric of heaven and earth before our eyes, rendering himself, in a certain manner, manifest in them. For his eternal power and Godhead (as Paul says) are there exhibited, (Rom. 1: 20). And that declaration of David is most true, that the heavens, though without a tongue, are yet eloquent heralds of the glory of God, and that this most beautiful order of nature silently proclaims his admirable wisdom, (Ps. 19: 1). This is the more diligently to be observed, because so few pursue the right method of knowing God, while the greater part adhere to the creatures without any consideration of the Creator himself. For men are commonly subject to these two extremes; namely, that some, forgetful of God, apply the whole force of their mind to the consideration of nature; and others, overlooking the works of God, aspire with a foolish and insane curiosity to inquire into his Essence. Both labour in vain. To be so occupied in the investigation of the secrets of nature, as never to turn the eyes to its Author, is a most perverted study; and to enjoy everything in nature without acknowledging the Author of the benefit, is the basest ingratitude. Therefore, they who assume to be philosophers without Religion, and who, by speculating, so act as to remove God and all sense of piety far from them, will one day feel the force of the expression of Paul, related by Luke, that God has never left himself without witness, (Acts 14: 17). For they shall not be permitted to escape with impunity because they have been deaf and insensible to testimonies so illustrious. And, in truth, it is the part of culpable ignorance, never to see God, who everywhere gives signs of his presence. But if mockers now escape by their cavils, hereafter their terrible destruction will bear witness that they were ignorant of God, only because they were willingly and maliciously blinded. As for those who proudly soar above the world to seek God in his unveiled essence, it is impossible but that at length they should entangle themselves in a multitude of absurd figments. For God--by other means invisible--(as we have already said) clothes himself, so to speak, with the image of the world in which he would present himself to our contemplation. They who will not deign to behold him thus magnificently arrayed in the incomparable vesture of the heavens and the earth, afterwards suffer the just punishment of their proud contempt in their own ravings. Therefore, as soon as the name of God sounds in our ears, or the thought of him occurs to our minds, let us also clothe him with this most beautiful ornament; finally, let the world become our school if we desire rightly to know God.(Calvin, Commentary on Genesis, Argument)
Correct me if I'm wrong, but is Jean Calvin not in fact doing the "Zen-master" bit here and sternly slapping us out of ungrounded abstract reverie and back to that which is concrete? Yet crucially, this does not imply for Calvin the embracing of any kind of reductionist materialism. Precisely not so. For Calvin it is in the material cosmos, and only in the material cosmos, that we encounter God (to be sure, the Scriptures are given as "eye-glasses" through which to view the cosmos with greater accuracy, as Calvin elsewhere teaches, but the point holds). Can we let that astounding fact sink in? Let us re-read Calvin's last few sentences all the more carefully:
As for those who proudly soar above the world to seek God in his unveiled essence, it is impossible but that at length they should entangle themselves in a multitude of absurd figments. For God--by other means invisible--(as we have already said) clothes himself, so to speak, with the image of the world in which he would present himself to our contemplation. They who will not deign to behold him thus magnificently arrayed in the incomparable vesture of the heavens and the earth, afterwards suffer the just punishment of their proud contempt in their own ravings. Therefore, as soon as the name of God sounds in our ears, or the thought of him occurs to our minds, let us also clothe him with this most beautiful ornament; finally, let the world become our school if we desire rightly to know God.
Thus from a Calvinist point of view, our rationality and speech are not blank phenomena in a blank evolutionist cosmos. Our thoughts and words are not mere biochemical "white noise" - they are analogous of the eternal and infinite Logos. Our bodies are analogous of His body in Whose image we are made. The universe, with its vast space, is analogous of Him. And therefore of us, who are made in His image. The space of the universe is a glimpse of the space of the freedom for which Christ has set us free. He is True Space. True Room-to-Breathe. True Freedom.
"If the Son makes you free, you will be free indeed." (John 8:36)
________________________________
Inscription à :
Articles (Atom)