#not like sacred philosophical treatises | Explore Tumblr posts and blogs

tanadrin · 7 years ago

Text

The Interview

After waiting for half an hour, Pray was well and truly bored. She fiddled with her terminal, then wandered around looking at the bookcases on the far wall. They were full of thick tomes like Interplanetary Development Economics, Sixteenth Edition and A Political History of the Martian Colonies, Volume Six. She rolled her eyes. Whoever used this office was trying to project a very specific image, and was killing a lot of trees to do it. There was a thin layer of dust over the books, too; they probably read them in digital copies, just like everybody else. If they’d even read them. She wandered over to the window that occupied the entire wall behind the desk. It afforded a sweeping view of downtown Abuja. The city was staggeringly vast. Pray knew that, somewhere in the back of her mind, but she never could comprehend just how vast unless she saw it in person. The first large city she’d ever been to in her life was Seattle. Her little apartment there had had a narrow view of the skyline, framed by two taller buildings, and even that narrow glimpse had seemed like a window into a huge, exciting place. Up here, the arcologies and the skyscrapers were two or three skylines all to themselves, strung out below her--and another beyond that, a whole extra city even bigger than Seattle or Vancouver. And another beyond that. And another. And another. She turned away from the window, feeling a little dizzy. She strode over to the desk, and sat down in the enormous high-backed swivel chair. She pushed off tentatively from the desk; the chair spun slowly, almost frictionlessly, in silence. Well, well. Control did not skimp out when it came to office furniture. She gave herself another push.

“Heh,” she whispered quietly to herself. “This is fun.”

Push. Spin. Push.

“Ma’am?”

Pray slapped her hand down on the desk and froze herself mid-spin. There was a tall, thin man, dressed in a carefully tailored suit standing at the door.

“Er… the director will be in in a moment,” he said. “Would you like anything? Water? Tea?”

Pray just shook her head. She only felt a little embarrassed. They were the ones wasting her time, after all.

The director strode in a few minutes later. He was bald, with a bushy gray goatee and a heavily lined face. Pray thought he looked like her grandfather, maybe, except much more serious. He didn’t even blink when he saw Pray sitting behind his desk. He sat in one of the large, heavy armchairs facing her, and spun the console around to face the other way.

“Good afternoon, Ms--what surname do you use these days?”

“Just Pray,” Pray said.

“Very well. Ms Pray. Welcome. I’m sorry to have kept you waiting.”

Pray shrugged. Not exactly an “It’s OK.” More of a “Pretty much what I expected.”

“I’m Director Osondu.” He tapped a few keys on the console and brought up a set of files; from behind the screen they were flipped and out of focus, but Pray could see a photo of her featured largely at the top.

“Your CV,”the director said, indicating the console.

“I never sent you my CV,” Pray said, raising an eyebrow. “I don’t have a CV.”

“We took the trouble of compiling one for you ourselves. We do that with many of our potential employees.”

“I’ve also never applied to work at Control.”

Director Osondu smiled. “No. But I’m hoping I can convince you.”

Pray laughed. “You want to offer me a job?”

The director nodded. “And not a job reviewing reports in Maitama, either. We have an assignment in mind.”

Pray leaned back in Osondu’s chair.

“What makes you think I’d want to work for Control? Heck, what makes you think I’m qualified?”

“Let’s see here. You were born in Washington, yes? In a Radhite community near Echo Valley?”

“Cooper Mountain, actually. People get the two mixed up.” If they’ve heard of them, she thought. Which they never have.

“Ah, yes. Let me fix that.” His hand darted over the console briefly. “You exercised your exit rights when you were sixteen, for reasons involving--let’s see here--personal bodily autonomy?”

“Yes. That’s correct.”

“Our records don’t elaborate on what those reasons were.”

“Good.” Pray stared at him, remaining pointedly silent.

“Ahem. In any case, you spent six years subsequently in Seattle finishing your education, before moving to Europe, then Asia, then South America, then the Antarctic colonies, staying in no city for more than eighteen months at a time. And then three years ago you came to Abuja, and you’ve been here ever since.”

“Yup.”

“What drew you here, if I may ask?”

“I like big cities. I like moving around. I want to see the world.”

“You haven’t moved anywhere in years. You haven’t even changed apartments since six weeks after you got here. You do some analytical work to supplement your basic, mostly for financial conglomerates and political outfits, but with your intelligence and abilities, you could easily find full-time work, enough to live pretty damn well. Even move to Mars, or the outer Solar System if you wanted.”

“What can I say? I’ve never been that interested in space travel. I like high gravity and being able to go outside from time to time. And I like my apartment. It’s cozy. Do you keep a close eye on everybody who decides to use their exit rights as a teenager? ‘Cause I gotta say, this is kinda creeping me out.”

“My apologies. We don’t as a rule, no. We consider the third freedom absolute. However, we have been interested in you for a long time. We just haven’t known… exactly what approach you might be most receptive to.”

“Well. This isn’t a good one, you know.”

“I haven’t finished making my pitch yet.”

“All right. So make it.”

“We want you to travel. In space.”

Pray laughed.

“Absolutely not,” she said. “There’s not enough money in the world.”

The director stood, and walked over to the bookshelf. He touched one finger to his lips, thinking for a minute.

“Forgive me,” he said, after a long silence. “I want to choose my words carefully, because I wish to express myself precisely.” He took a slim volume off the shelf, came back over to the desk, and slid it across the surface. Pray stiffened when she saw the title. It was Radha Munroe’s First Treatise.

“You know that book well, yes?”

Pray nodded.

“Would you agree that it’s, shall we say, convincing?”

Pray nodded again. “Sure. What’s your point?”

“It’s not just convincing. It’s elegant. Learned. Often, even, poetic. So profound, to at least some of its readers, that thirty years after the death of its author it found new life as the textual center of a movement. Something not quite political, not quite spiritual, and not quite personal, but located at the intersection of all three. A new, totalizing philosophy that built a community and transformed lives.”

“High praise.”

“I mean it sincerely. Do you know how many Radhites have exercised their exit rights since the first Radhite community was founded more than two hundred years ago?”

“Not many, I’m guessing.”

“Exactly one. You.”

The director took the book back. Pray could feel herself relaxing as he slipped it out of view.

“It’s not that I agree with everything Radha Monroe wrote. Nor do I think there have not been other Radhites who may have wanted to leave. But such is the persuasion and the power of the Radhite philosophy that, quite without coercion, at least of the kind that would provoke sanctions from Control, they have formed some of the most hermetically sealed communities in the Solar System. And believe me, we monitor the Radhites very closely. Yes, it’s true. We’re very careful. As I said--the third freedom is absolute. The closest thing we have to something sacred in this day and age.”

“They’re very good at brainwashing. So what?”

“The Radhites are uniquely good at it, if that’s the term we’re going to use. Every other community in the Archipelago has some kind of attrition, and the larger the community, the higher the absolute quantity. Religious communes, philosophical societies, intentional communities--it is an absolute. Some have higher attrition rates than others, but they all have them. All except the Radhites. Until you, anyway. And since you, not one. Not even from Cooper Mountain.

“My point, Pray, is that you are exceptional. Your biography alone--the fact you are out here, in the world, for me to speak to--makes you exceptional.”

The director flicked through Pray’s file faster now.

“Your life since, however, makes you even more remarkable. You graduated from university at age twenty, with top marks. You took proficiency exams which could have garnered you the position of your choice in the civil service or at one of a number of academic institutes--or even in Control--but you contented yourself with analytical work on the side. And your analytical work, particularly on emerging social trends, is considered on par with some of the best research collectives. Only an AI might do better--but AI won’t do this kind of thing.”

“AI can’t,” Pray muttered. “They only say they won’t.”

“If you did more than one report every three months, you could be living in a luxurious Japanese arcology. Or on the Moon. Anywhere you wanted, really. But instead you content yourself with a small apartment in Gudu. Lately you don’t even travel. I think I know why.”

“Do tell.”

“You’re bored. Government work doesn’t interest you. Bureaucratic work certainly doesn’t. And you know Control has a reputation for excellence, but you think all we are is glorified paper-pushers and, occasionally, law enforcement. Maybe you genuinely don’t like space travel, but I suspect you think there are simply no interesting challenges to be had elsewhere in the Solar System, so you prefer to spend your time reading and studying and watching the world from afar. You think maybe one day you will find a topic, a cause, a company somewhere that is interesting enough for you to feel really invested in, but you’re not holding your breath. You came to Abuja because it’s one of the biggest cities in the world. It’s home to Control, to a third of all U.N. agencies, and it’s as close as any city to the beating heart of humanity. But even here there’s nothing to draw you in.”

Pray shifted nervously in her seat. A small voice in her head told her to push off from the desk, and just roll her way down the elevator. As though if she did it smoothly enough, the director wouldn’t notice.

“That all sounds very speculative to me,” she said.

“Nonetheless, I think it is accurate speculation. Speculation of this kind is the reason I am valuable to Control. We think you could be valuable to us for other reasons. And we think you could get something in return.”

“Which would be?”

“Something you can be excited about. Would you like to meet an AI?”

Pray cocked her head. Now that. That was something new.

“You do not ‘meet’ AIs,” she said. “They don’t exactly socialize.”

“Nonetheless, I know where you could meet one. One who is very interested in meeting you.”

“You’re messing with me,” Pray said flatly.

“I do not mess.”

“Where? When?”

“Here. And now.”

“And I have to accept your job offer, whatever it is?”

“Not at all. They will help me explain it. Then you can decide whether to accept it or not.”

Pray leaned forward in her chair.

“I’m listening.”

The director entered a command into his console; a large screen emerged from the wall to the left, and flickered to life. What appeared on it was rather like a face, or the ghost of a face: a suggestion of eyes and a mouth and other, less distinct features on a flickering, phosphorescent background that sometimes cohered into something strikingly human, and sometimes suggested something altogether alien. Pray stared at the screen with intense interest; she realized she was holding her breath.

AI did not, as a matter of course, involve themselves closely in human affairs. The dream, centuries ago, had been creatures made in mankind’s image: creatures of humanlike dispositions and intellect, implemented in the medium of a machine. Of androids, perhaps, or things vaster and far more than human in their powers, but human enough in their values and desires that there could still be meaningful conversation between them and us, even if it was as a mere mortal might speak to an angel.

That turned out not to be the reality.

Artificial intelligence, machine intelligence, had indeed come, but it came from a quarter and in a manner no one had quite expected. The result was emphatically unhuman. Not inhuman; not monstrous. But just as the mammalian intellect had inevitably been the outcome of a certain evolutionary process, a certain set of cognitive solutions to specific biological and ecological problems, the machine intellect was a different set of answers to an entirely different set of questions.

Three hundred years ago, after the first tentative and failed attempts to establish a permanent presence in star systems outside the one humanity had arisen in, during the dark age between the second and third space races, the first true, general machine intelligences had been created. The results proved alien and unsettled many; even attempts to record entire human brain states, to provide the AI with as complete an understanding as possible of their creators, had only bridged the gap a little. That unease grew into genuine fear when an AI colony was discovered orbiting a brown dwarf a little under seven light years away.

Their goals, the machines said, were different from ours. They need not be in opposition; they were not our enemy. And they were willing to help us, to be of use to us so far as they were able, but if the utopians of previous centuries had dreamed of a society where man and machine were twined together, a symbiosis of two distinct but complementary organisms, well, that hope seemed to have been dashed. For the most part, they would pursue their own existence and their own ends. Control was entrusted to be the mediators between Core and the AIs, but as far as anybody knew, even Control’s contact with them was only sporadic and brief. Pray had never dared hope she might meet an AI herself.

“Pray, meet Lepanto. Lepanto, meet Pray.”

The shimmering face seemed to nod, and spoke with a synthesized voice that had a hint of the uncanny about it. Such, Pray had heard, was the norm; machines, no less than humans, did not their interlocutors to forget how alien they were to one another.

“Greetings, Pray,” Lepanto said. “I am pleased to meet you.”

“I, uh, yeah. You too,” Pray said. “Welcome to Earth.”

“Thank you. In fact I have been here for some time; we maintain a small presence in Core systems at Control’s expense.”

“Lepanto is a mediator,” the director said. “Their lineage is intended to facilitate communication with our people, but you should be aware, they are merely… less alien.”

“Indeed.” Lepanto’s image wavered, and for a brief moment, was full of a surfeit of eyes and other strange features. “I am here because Control has identified an interest common to my kind and yours. We believe that you, Pray, would be of particular help in solving our quandary.”

“Why me?” Pray asked.

The director turned the console to face Pray, and struck a key. The file being displayed was replaced with an image of a world, something computer generated maybe, or taken from orbit.

“Have you ever heard of a colony world called Ecumen?” the director asked.

“It doesn’t ring a bell,” Pray said.

“It’s old. It was colonized in the 2600s.”

“I didn’t think there were any colonies that old that had succeeded.”

“Nor did we,” the director said. “Until about twenty years ago, when Ecumen was rediscovered by the machines.”

“What did you find out?”

“Distant surveys told us little,” Lepanto said. “We sent a high-velocity probe to the system, to initiate contact. Four mediators, like myself, working in concern. Their report--disturbed us.”

The image on the console changed; various surface features were highlighted or shown blown up, in inset frames. Ecological data. Large urban centers. A handful of small space stations and orbital manufacturing.

“It looks pretty normal to me,” Pray said.

“On the surface, yes,” Lepanto continued. “Artifacts, not apparent to human eyes. Problem akin to Benford’s Law.”

“Explain?”

“The frequency distribution of numbers in data sets. Favors low numbers in leading digits, yes? Consequence emerges from data spanning many orders of magnitude; easy to detect when data is falsified if it fails to conform. Not immediately obvious to human eyes.”

The console changed again; a dozen graphs appeared. Demographic and actuarial data, economic information, patterns of migration, and more that Pray couldn’t make immediate sense of.

“Emissaries spoke to Ecumen, learned of their history. Their societies. Their culture. Sought to understand them as we seek to understand all human worlds. We learned much. But the patterns were anomalous. Irregular. Wrong.”

“So they gave you bad data?”

“No. All data corroborated. Independently verified, from sources and from our own orbital surveys. Problem apparent in the data, not an artifact of the data. Something is terribly wrong on Ecumen.”

“So it’s an outlier. There are almost two dozen colony worlds now. Every one has its own unique environment and circumstances. They can’t all be the same.”

“We have spent more than a decade examining this data. The emissaries brought it to the attention of the collective, which took an immediate interest; more than half our stable nodes were diverted to attempting to understand Ecumen. It is an impossible world. It should not and cannot exist as it does. Population growth rates follow anomalous patterns that do not conform to any understanding of human biology or society, even accounting for specific conditions. Similarly, economic investment. Patterns of land cultivation. Everywhere, something is off.”

“The reports the collectives have compiled are… dense, to be sure,” the director said. “Not all of it is very accessible to our analysts. But Control makes a habit of compiling as much data as it can about human societies and their development. We couldn’t do our job otherwise. And we agree. Something very unusual is happening on Ecumen, and only on Ecumen.”

Pray was scrolling through the data on the console now. It was certainly suggestive of something, but she’d be damned if she knew what.

“And there are underlying patterns here? It’s not just random deviation?”

“No,” Lepanto said. “In fact, the patterns conform to specific mathematical structures that, until we shared with Control, we believe were not known to any humans, in Core or the colonies.”

A series of complex, shifting geometric figures appeared on the screen. “The collectives consider questions of natural science,” Lepanto continued. “It is important to us, as it is to you, to understand the universe. We wish to know many things about it--how it operates, how it came to be. It is one of the few areas in which we understand ourselves to be very like you. We are both curious.”

“And these are?”

“Three-dimensional representations of complex mathematical objects that govern the states of fundamental particles in certain simulated universes. They correspond closely to the patterns we perceive in Ecumen’s human population.”

“So you’re saying there is a natural basis for these patterns?”

“No. All these patterns arise only in universes which have physical laws radically different from our own. Almost all, universes where life, human or machine, could not exist.”

Pray sat back in the director’s chair and stared at the screen, turning over a hundred possibilities in her mind. Yes, indeed. Something strange was going on on Ecumen. Maybe a coincidence. Maybe not.

“And there’s no way this is random?” she asked. “That you’re seeing patterns in chaotic information that have arisen by chance, excluding everything that doesn’t fit?”

“It is not pareidolia, if that is what you mean,” Lepanto said. “Conditions on Ecumen have continued to align with our forecasts. The data is predictive.”

“Are you interested?” the director asked.

“Oh, it’s all interesting as hell,” Pray said. “But what on Earth do you want me to do?”

“We’re sending a delegation to Ecumen. Officially, it’s diplomatic: Control has no presence there, and since Ecumen is interesting in acceding to the treaties, we’d like to open diplomatic relations. And, for obvious reasons, we’re a little nervous about them coming here, in case this phenomenon is somehow capable of spreading. But along with the diplomatic team, we’re sending some researchers, and a few agents to assist them. They, with Lepanto’s help, will conduct an intensive study of Ecumen, and attempt to figure out what’s behind all this. We’d like you to be part of the team. But, of course, I know how you feel about space travel…”

“Fuck that,” Pray said quickly. “I’ll do it.”

The director smiled. He slipped a folded-up piece of paper from his suit pocket and laid it on the desk. “Here’s an employment contract, if you’d like to look it over. If you sign before lunch, there’s an orientation for new analysts being conducted on the 16th floor at two o’clock.”

“That’s it? You don’t want to, like, interview me or something?”

The director shook his head and stood. “Ms Pray, it is our job to identify the best and the brightest, to help them achieve their greatest potential in exchange for helping us safeguard and support the flourishing of the human race. We don’t conduct ‘job interviews.’” He paused for a moment. “You do get an expense account, though. They’ll tell you the specifics at orientation.”

Pray unfolded the sheet of paper and started reading. The director cleared his throat. Loudly.

“However,” he said, “If you don’t mind, I’d like my office back now.”

#tanadrin's fiction

13 notes · View notes

libramonthlyhoroscope1 · 3 years ago

Text

4499 angel number

The angel number 4499 is the quintessence of altruism and sensitivity to other people’s harm.

He is very emotional about all aspects of life. It is primarily focused on helping others.

Number 4499 – What Does It Mean?

The 4499 sacrifices himself for the good of all and always looks after the weak. He cares for those in need, recognizing their suffering.

The 4499 does not want to remain indifferent to the fate of people with disabilities, the poor, the abandoned and all those who need any help.

Number 4499 is extremely sensitive and emotional. Her heart lands at the sight of any injustice.

The more so that he can perfectly empathize with other people’s situation. He bends over him and provides support.

By nature, she is a helpful person, with enormous layers of innate kindness.

Angel Number 4499 is positive for everyone, he is a nice companion with whom you can always have a good time.

What’s more, the 4499 really clings to people. She enjoys new acquaintances, is fascinated by the whole world and the beings living in it – not only Homo sapiens, but all animals.

Sometimes numerological Nines are very friendly, but that’s not always an advantage. It happens that 4499 is susceptible to manipulation and use by other, more cunning individuals.

She often turns out to be too submissive because she doesn’t want to offend the other person.

This approach may not end positively for nine. So she should be careful about who she deals with and what projects she undertakes, both at work and in her free time.

4499 naivety can make someone use her.

However, this is not the worst part. The Deceived 4499 may doubt her mission in life – helping others.

It is true that he will still trust people, but may no longer be so willing to sacrifice for them. This is a great loss to the world, because Nines do the most for him.

Numerological 4499 is spiritual and devotes a lot of her time to personal development.

He reads sacred texts, philosophical treatises and wants to learn new and wonderful things.

He is eager to polish both intellect and intuition – thus striving for self-realization as a good person.

It can even be said that 4499 means spiritual fulfillment – the highest form of human existence.

The Secret Meaning and Symbolism

There is a lot of enthusiasm for new ventures in the heart of the Nine. He is always happy to start a new project.

She is extremely excited and enjoys each subsequent stage of the plan’s implementation.

Of course, her classes related to helping bring her the most joy. In this case, he can turn into a purebred workaholic.

The Way of Life of the 4499 is inseparably connected with opposing injustice.

The 4499 can’t understand how some people can treat their fellow men.

He will never agree to this fact and will fight it with all his might, often subordinating most of his life to this task.

Whatever career he chooses, he will forever remain an injustice hunter in his immediate surroundings.

The number 4499 will always fight for individual freedom. It does not matter whether it is done on a large scale or on a small scale.

It will invariably oppose anything that brings harm or suffering.

Also, all forms of enslavement are mercilessly exterminated by the Nine.

He does not agree to the slave credit banking system, hunger wages or junk contracts.

These are things that, according to the Nine, should not exist in the world at all.

Love and Angel Number 4499

The number 4499 is altruistic, romantic and free-thinking. He is a truly unique person and most people around him clearly see it.

It is no wonder then that the 4499 is often in the center of attention of a large group of friends.

She also likes to spend time with people, so it’s mutual interest.

Numerological 4499 loves new adventures very much, so without hesitation he throws himself into new experiences whenever an opportunity arises.

Of course, this should be related to meeting new people. After all, there can be no real adventures without them.

One thing you need to know about Nine’s personality is that she is extremely honest and has a very humane approach to everything.

He always helps the needy, cares for the weak and stupid … well, he teaches.

He will not leave anyone alone. He can help even his worst enemy if he sees it as an opportunity to change for the better.

The 4499 loves one more thing: romance.

Especially those with a mysterious aftertaste of the forbidden fruit. Getting to know the love secrets of other people, the 4499 is convinced that she has gained control over someone.

And although she is not intoxicated with power, she is extremely satisfied with the awareness of keeping someone in check.

Nine is not very stable in love. It is difficult for her to remain in a stable relationship unless her partner is as independent as she is.

A quiet, routine life is not appealing to the numerological number nine.

She prefers stormy romance and intrigue – they are much more interesting and the 4499 pays more attention to them than to marriage.

Deep down, 4499 is a tireless romantic. He dreams of seducing and seducing his whole life.

She wants love adventures in an exotic country or a mysterious relationship that no one knows about.

The thrill of winning the heart of another person is the highest expression of satisfaction for nine.

Interesting Facts about Number 4499

Extraordinary visions of the future are swirling in Nine’s head. She has many dreams and plans, seeing them as great opportunities.

He predicts wonderful results, although in reality he doesn’t always fully realize everything according to his intentions.

During his life, the 4499 changes his profession many times. It is a bit not adapted to the environment and therefore often falls out of the game for a stable place in a group or company.

The most important thing she should take as a point of honor is learning to adapt to the rest. It is not about giving up her ambitions and beliefs.

It’s enough to temper everything a bit and make it more “digestible” to the public.

It is very important for the 4499 to avoid making promises without coverage. Unfortunately, she has a tendency to do so.

He often withdraws at the last moment from his promises, which has often upset someone.

In the company of the 4499 she is charming and nice. It’s the heart of every party. She is enthusiastic about any kind of fun.

No wonder people love to have her around. Positive thinking of the 4499 is contagious – everyone in her company has a good time.

Unfortunately, the 4499 doesn’t like to tie up. So when relations with a person become too serious, the 4499 quickly disappears.

0 notes

ajaymodicare · 3 years ago

Text

Rig Vedic Period - 1500 BC - 1000 BC

These cities in Harappan Culture. Harappan Culture had declined by 1900 BC. As a result, their economy and administrative system slowly decreased. Several centuries later, Indo-Aryan speakers, Sanskrit, entered the north-west of India through the Indo-Iranian area. In the beginning, they were likely to have travelled in small groups through mountain passes that lie in the northwestern region. The first settlements they made were in the valleys in the north-west, and in the plains that comprise the Punjab. Then, they moved to Indo-Gangetic plains. Since they were mostly livestock-keepers who were mostly seeking pastures. At the time of the 6th century BC they had occupied the entire region area of North India, which was called Aryavarta. The time period between 1500 B.C and 600 B.C could be divided into two periods: the Early Vedic Period or Rig Vedic Period (1500 BC to 1000 BC) in addition to later, the Later Vedic Period (1000 BC to 600 BC).

In the Rig Vedic period, Aryans were mostly in the Indus region of modern-day Pakistan. It is believed that the Rig Veda refers to Saptasindhu also known as"the land with seven rivers. The five river systems of Punjab including Jhelum, Chenab, Ravi, Beas and Sutlej along with the Indus and Saraswathi. This period poses trouble for Indian historiography since the earliest historical (as as opposed to mythical] phase of Indian history didn't take position in India. Indian historiography has tends to shift the central point that is the center of Rig Vedic culture out of Pakistan to lands that are which is associated with Modern India and has also tended to alter the timeline of the disappearance in Harappan Culture to suggest a continuity between Harappan Culture and Rig Vedic culture, and a mark with greater antiquity to the more recent period, where the most reliable evidence indicates a gap of almost half a millennium.

The location of origin for people called Aryans is a subject of debate and there are a variety of opinions. Many scholars recognize distinct regions as the ancestral place of residence for the Aryans. These comprise regions like the Arctic area, Germany, Central Asia and the southern part of Russia. Bala Gangadhara Tilak argues that the Aryans originated directly from the Arctic region based on astronomical calculations. But, the theory of southern Russia is more likely and is popular with historians. The Aryans were able to move to different regions in Asia as well as Europe. They migrated to India in the 1500s BC and became called Indo-Aryans. They spoke Indo-Aryan, Sanskrit.

"Veda," as a word, comes taken from the root word "vid" which means to be aware. This means that the word 'Veda' is a reference to superior knowledge. The Vedic literature is comprised of the four Vedas, namely Rig, Yajur, Sama and Atharva. Atharva is the most famous. Rig Veda was the oldest one of all the Vedas, and it contains 1028 hymns. The songs were sung in the praise of gods from all over. It is believed that the Yajur Veda consists of various specifics of rules that must be observed during the moment of sacrifice. In the Sama Veda is set to tune to facilitate singing during the ritual of sacrifice. It is known as"the book that chants,", and the roots of Indian music can be traced through it. It is also known as the Atharva Veda. Atharva Veda contains details of rituals.

In addition to the Vedas and the other sacred texts, including the Brahmanas and the Upanishads and the Aranyakas and the epics Ramayana and Mahabharata. The Brahmanas are the treatises related to sacrificial and prayer. They are also known as the Upanishads are philosophical works that deal with subjects such as being the spirit, eternal nature of the universe, and the mystery of nature. The Aranyakas are also known as forests books and are about mysticism, ritesand rituals and sacrifices. The writer of Ramayana was Valmiki and the author from Mahabharata Was Vedavyas.

The social, political and cultural activities that of Rig Vedic people can be identified from the songs in the Rig Veda. The most fundamental element of the political system was kula, also known as family. Many families came together in accordance with their closeness in order to create a village, or the grama. The leader of the grama was called Gramani. Villages in a group formed an even larger unit known as visu. It was led by vishayapati. The highest level of political organization was called jana , or tribe.

There were many tribes in the Rig Vedic period such as Bharatas, Matsyas, Yadus and Purus. The leader of each kingdom was referred to as rajan or the king. In the Rig Vedic polity was normally monarchical, and lineage was hereditary. The monarch was assisted by purohita , or priest, and senani who was the general in his administration. The two bodies that were popular were known as Sabha and Samiti. Sabha or Samiti. The first appears to have been a council made up of elders, while the latter was an assembly of the entire population.

It was believed that the Rig Vedic culture was patriarchal. The primary element of society was the family, or the graham. Head of family members was referred to as a grahapathi. It was common practice to have monogamy, but polygamy was popular among noble and royal families. The wife was responsible for the household and took part in every major ceremony. Women were offered the same chances as men to develop their intellectual and spiritual growth. Women poets included Apala, Viswavara, Ghosa and Lopamudra in the Rig Vedic period. Women could also attend popular gatherings. The church did not allow children to marriages and the custom of sati was not in place.

Both genders were dressed in upper and lower clothes comprised of wool and cotton. There were a variety of ornaments utilized by both males as well as women. Barley and wheat, milk and its derivatives like curd and ghee, as well as vegetables as well as fruits are the main items of food. Consuming cow's flesh was forbidden because it was considered an animal of the sacred. Horse racing, chariot racing along with music and dance were among the most popular activities. Social divides were not as unbreakable in the Rig Vedic period as it was during the second Vedic period.

They were pastoral settlers and their primary occupation was the rearing of cattle. Their wealth was measured on the basis of their livestock. After they settled permanently within North India they began to engage in agriculture. Through the use and knowledge of iron, they could clear the trees and also bring land under cultivation. Carpentery was a different occupation and the abundance of wood from forest cleared made the trade lucrative. Carpenters built ploughs and chariots. Metal workers created a range of items made of bronze, copper and iron.

Spinning was also a significant occupation and cotton and woolen textiles were used to make them. Goldsmiths were involved in the creation of ornaments. Potters created a variety of vessels used in domestic usage. Trade was another significant business activity, and rivers were utilized as a major means of transportation. Trade was conducted through barter systems. Later gold coins, nishka were used as mediums for exchange in big transactions.

They worshipped the natural forces of fire, earth as well as wind, rain and thunder. They transformed these natural forces as a myriad of gods and revered them. The major Rig Vedic gods were Prithvi (Earth), Agni (Fire), Vayu (Wind), Varuna (Rain) and Indra (Thunder). Indra was most well-known among them in the beginning of the Vedic period. In second place behind Indra is Agni who was considered to be an intermediary between gods and the people. Varuna was believed to be the protector for the nature order. There were female gods as well, such as Aditi as well as Ushas. There were no temples , and no idol worship in the beginning of the Vedic period. Prayers were offered up to gods to seek rewards. Ghee, milk, and grains were offered as sacrifices. A complex ritual was followed in the ceremony of worship.

0 notes

extremerabbit123 · 6 years ago

Text

In Progress

Introduction

I hear talking of people

The whole world has gone insane

And all there is left is the fallin' rain

All there is left is the fallin' rain- Link Wray

There appears to be an urgency, a strangeness, or an impending state of chaos emerging that many feel they have never felt before. Across this country and around the world, people are feeling it. Thoughts and feelings may vary from one person to another, but the common entry into this frail psychical state adjoins one subject to the rest. A footnote with no ending could be written about the disparity of consciousness that shatters itself into piece upon piece. And another footnote with no ending could be written about why this is.

Technological change has accelerated very quickly. We are now in the future, as opposed to the lukewarm digital age of the late twentieth century. Premonitions of apocalypse have crossed over from religious fundamentalism and into the secular realm. What does apocalypse really mean, though? Doomsday, or the lifting of an illusory veil? Unfortunately, God’s will and the human will to mistakenly re-enact the events of sacred texts might be adjoined after all these years, at least in their cumulative weight on the outcome of the world. But the day opens, and the heart binds itself to the garden of bondage and liberation-

under the burden of often invisible weights,

plants, humans, and other animals

are obstructed from mere sleep.

We wake and in this garden of mixed polarities, we feign survival in literal and symbolic breath. Lights go out. Some stay on- and in this space we are undone. We are still mostly hidden from each other, but the reverberations emanate as they did from day one. There is senseless suffering, sterile plateaus of non-material foundation, and the quaint disconnect as these both erupt from day to day. One looks to another, though, and all is born again. Bless this if you can. Anoint the frame. Freight trains move on in day and in night. We will meet as particles, or as intonations in music of the world unknown

I. The Presence, The Mother

Nebulous nearnesses cry to me

At this timeless moment someone dear to me

Wants me near, makes me high

I can hear vibrations fly- the Incredible String Band

One of the most well known Jewish theologians of the twentieth century, Martin Buber put forth a version of Judaism that, in spite of its lack of emphasis on traditional ritual, converged with the renewed interest in Jewish mysticism, as well as various other forms of mysticism, in the mid-twentieth century. Arguably his signature work, the text I and Thou is a treatise on the relationships among humans and humans’ relationship to God. He talks about two conjunctions that define the whole of humanity’s perception. There is the realm of the I-It, and then there is that of the I-Thou.

The I-It exists in the world of objects. Once a Thou, or You, becomes a He or She for the I, then the I crosses over into the realm of the I-It. This can extend to the ways in which people perceive anything, not exclusively other humans. The difference between standing in pure relation to say, a tree, and contemplating said tree as an object to be marked by taxonomy, measurement, and other forms of classifications is great, according to Buber. The former relationship is the I-Thou relationship, while the latter is stuck in the world of I-It.

Of course, this dynamic is a model in miniature of humans’ relationship with the eternal I-Thou, otherwise known as God. Buber stresses the I-Thou relationship as being more significant than the I-It relationship, in spite of the I-It dynamic being a fact of life and consciousness, a necessity of life even. As such, Buber does not place importance on the intricacies within the I or the Thou, whether he is discussing humans or the divine. It is the space of relationship between them that is important, in which the particularities of subject and object are dwarfed by the mere fact that one entity is locked in the present moment with another. An overlooked avenue in human consciousness according to Buber as he wrote in the early twentieth century, this is the I-Thou. Within lies the true, unadulterated relationship between humans and their natural environment as well as the divine.

Of course, there is an ever-undulating movement between beholding something as an object and the supposed transcendence of objectification. Generations of theorists following Buber have provided further description of the dynamic between “self” and “other,” with the term “other” providing a bit of a variation on the Buberian “thou.” For philosopher Emmanuel Levinas, we cannot presume to know the “other” at all. It is due to this very fact, according to Levinas, that we are responsible towards this “other.” This may be superior to Buber’s I-Thou in some ways, when we are to consider the fragmentation of lenses through which each subject experiences the world. Mystery fuels the altruism of Levinas’ ethics, and this could be, like Buber, extended to his view of God as a Talmudic scholar.

If we are to consider the possible pitfalls of acting with responsibility towards this other, we must take into account that there is a simultaneous presence of patterns and anomalies in this world. Italian philosopher Giorgio Agamben apprehends the other with using the term “whatever.” The “whatever” being is both singular and informed by factors that extend beyond its singularity. If we are to view a person, we can both see them as singular and as a product of factors often cited to be influential in someone’s perspective and experience in a way that is not informed by the person’s own volition. These factors can include race, class, gender, orientation, creed, and several other categories of identity. However, it would be going a bit too far to characterize these factors as the sole things that define a person. There is a delicate balance that must be sought in honoring the mysterious singularity of what and whom confronts us in this world, and the acknowledgement that to be born in this world is not to be born with a blank slate. Furthermore, due to this intersection of anomaly and pattern, a human being is without a doubt a complex, mysterious entity in itself.

Zalman Schachter-Shalomi, one of the co-founders of the Jewish Renewal movement, drew upon the mysticism of his Chabad Lubavitch background and brought it to a more secular and ecumenical context. Drawing on the Kabbalah, other categories of Jewish mysticism, and even elements of other world religions, he tended towards outlined the multiple processes of creation and human development and the intersections between both. As the Kabbalistic tradition in particular emphasizes the interdependency and interconnectedness of the physical and spiritual worlds, Schachter-Shalomi outlines the varied realms within the mind, body, and soul of a person.

The mere level of appearance is called guf. This is the mere surface of things, the scraps of impressions one may derive from simply looking at a person. Beyond this is nefesh, which encompasses a person’s biological intricacies; nefesh, while still referring to the physical world, may evoke both the hiddenness and complexity of the systems, organs, and chemicals that operate in keeping someone alive and ticking. Ruach, meaning “breath” or “spirit,” is the realm of emotion. Here we begin to emerge into non-material territory, and we move further into the realm of intellect, or neshamah. Beyond that is hayyah, which means the very will of a person, or their intuition. Finally, we get to yehidah, which refers to one’s union with God. This may be the substance of the Buberian I-Thou relationship.

The ascension from one realm to another is mirrored in Jewish religious services, proceeding from fostering awareness of physicality to the union with the divine. There are four “worlds” that incorporate the realms of the soul. There is Assiyah, the realm of action, which contains guf and nefesh, Yetzirah, the realm of formation, which contains ruach, Beriyah, the world of creation, which contains neshamah, and Atzilut, the highest realm, which contains hayyah and yehidah. The physical and spiritual realms are interdependent, and are constantly in contact in the process of creation. “Creation” here is used to bridge the event of the universe’s creation with history itself, blurring boundaries of space and time between them. This may remind us that in the midst of the all of creation’s presence, a story is being told. Actually, multiple stories are told. But sometimes, there is a harmony out of which we can draw a holistic view of a person’s life and death.

Julia Kristeva, a Bulgarian-born French philosopher, is considered by many to be one of the most original thinkers of the twentieth century. Her work spans multiple disciplines; first touching upon linguistics and politics, she then moved onward into the realm of psychoanalysis, which allowed her work, already immersed in the phenomena of avant-garde literature, to bridge the social sciences and the humanities. Like Buber’s theory of the twofold consciousness of the I-Thou and I-It, Kristeva does not separate language and subjective experience. In fact, just as Buber’s theory proposes, she classifies language as being an essential element to the mere construction of subjective experience.

But within this characterization of language’s immanence in subjectivity, more parallels between Buber and Kristeva await. Kristeva observes stages of early childhood development in which language moves from “baby talk” to recognizable linguistic structures. In the “pre-Oedipal phase,” the child’s vocalizations are a primitive attempt at expressing what is yet inexpressible in the terms the adults use. This intuitive, primal construction of language is an example of what Kristeva terms the realm of the “semiotic.” As time goes on, the child learns the structures of syntax and diction that create speech out of which recognizable meaning is derived by others. This “understandable” speech is deemed to be the “symbolic,” a word that hints at the fact that something and its common name are not linked inextricably. While the symbolic precedes from the pre-Oedipal semiotic phase, the semiotic is not absent; it underlies our everyday, common speech regardless. The interweaving of the semiotic and symbolic modes of expression produces “significance,” which according to Kristeva is the resulting product in human communication. So it goes with the I-Thou and I-It; the interplay between something pre-linguistic and the recognition of the surrounding world as separate and characterizable from oneself informs both subjectivity and language.

This aforementioned focus on early childhood is inherited by psychoanalysts going back to Sigmund Freud, but in characterizing the realm in which the semiotic utterances begin, Kristeva also draws upon Plato’s theory of the chora, an almost womb-like structure that preceded the creation of the universe itself. What makes Kristeva’s portrayal of this entity different is that Kristeva’s chora is not just the passive, immobile receptacle that Plato’s chora is portrayed to be. Plato’s chora is at the mercy of whatever fills it, but Kristeva’s is characterized by “motility,” or spontaneous movement in response to whatever fills it. In general, we see this concept of the chora mirrored in wisdom traditions spanning from Kabbalah to Taoism. In Kabbalah, the name for God is Ayn Sof, generally translated into English as “without end.” Ayn Sof existed before the creation of the universe, just as in the Tao Te Ching Lao Tzu describes the Tao as being “older than God.” These examples may be more in line with Plato’s theory of an immobile womb. Kristeva’s chora, on the other hand, deals with something more fluid and terrestrial.

Kabbalah is the most well known form of Jewish mysticism, but is not the only one. Furthermore, it is somewhat of a composite of traditions that came before, whether they be mystical or of a more hermeneutic variety such as Midrash. Kabbalah concerns itself with questions concerning the nature of God, how the universe was created, how this process of creation is mirrored across time and space, and, as a result of all of those questions, it attempts to address the question of “why we are here.”

For the Kabbalists, there is a need to provide some visual aid in the process of connecting with God, despite the fact that like Moses Maimonides, it is generally agreed upon that God is ultimately ineffable and incapable of being visualized. The Ten Sefirot represent a diagram of the effects of God’s presence in the universe, the world, and one’s individual soul. They exist outside of space and time, and together in the diagram they form what is called the tree of life. Like the four worlds and the dimensions of the soul, they are interdependent. What distinguishes the tree of life, however, is the way it links the particular and universal. The Sefirot of the soul and thereby the body are akin to chakra points as described by East Asian traditions, but the Tree of Life they comprise also is, as mentioned before, a map of the entire cosmos.

The lowest Sefirot on the tree of life, Malkhut, is also related to the concept of the Shekinah, or the “divine presence.” It is the dwelling place of the creation of the universe, the world, and all life. While Malkhut and thereby the Shekinah are the “lowest” on the Tree of Life, this does not mean that they are inferior or less important than other Sefirot. On the contrary, they are merely the most worldly or, to put it more eloquently, the most terrestrial. The Shekinah is related to what is identified across many traditions as being “the Divine Feminine.” This appears in traditions such as Hinduism as Kali or even in Christianity, where the Virgin Mary fills the void of what would appear on the surface, given the Father and Son dynamic therein, to be an absence of divinity’s more feminine aspects.

Without falling into the trap of gender essentialism, it may be important to grasp what is unique to this “Divine Feminine.” Unlike the typically transcendent and otherworldly masculine forms of divinity, this Divine Feminine concerns the more material, earthly forms. It is intimately connected with these more transcendent forms; neither could exist without the other. Vera de Chalambert, a contemporary mystic who works with spiritual direction, has been deeply invested in studying the presence of “the dark mother.” For her, it is elemental to confronting the messy, seemingly unholy parts of creation that we ultimately cannot transcend or avoid. This, for her, is essential to personal healing, and while she focuses on the Shekinah, the divine presence, she also outlines some of the developments in Kabbalistic teaching in which the transcendent, ineffable Ayn Sof is feminine or womb-like in nature.

In the 16th century, a Kabbalist named Isaac Luria developed the concept of tzimtzum, in which God is said to have contracted like a womb in order for creation to occur. Furthermore, the light of creation was originally contained in several vessels which eventually shattered, leaving the light of creation imprisoned in scattered shards. Thus, humanity’s mission is to simultaneously discover the sparks of light hidden in these shards and to also re-connect these fragments- fragments of the light of creation. This process is referred to as Tikkun Olam: “to heal the world,” or “to heal the universe.”

Said the garden to the airport,

"can you make my flower bloom?"

"Yes I can," said the airport,

"but you'll have to recall the way

all the flowers are indiscrete

when they point towards the sun;

every instance you create

is someone else's too."

So the lesson learned was that

the garden could not move.

But all the same it could recreate

the distance that was proved to be

an empty vessel for another memory to come-

the only thing that you can see

when the day is done.

You will not stand tall

but you will see

the promise that could quickly enter

your field,

always kept, but always free to wander,

the product of a passerby's

favor to your roots.

Said the garden to airport,

"this is not what I expected;

secretly I wanted your permission

to ride in the sky.

But I can see that I cannot do this if I try.

I guess I'll just stand by myself

and see if I can sprout my wings alone."

Said the airport to the garden,

"you cannot do this as well.

All you can do is receive sunlight

and water out the well.

But if you can be receptive you can

conquer all.

One way to look at is

you will never fall.”

II. It’s Just Meat: Matter, Spirit and the Path Forward

One of the earliest texts associated with the Kabbalistic tradition is the Sefer Yetzirah, or “the Book of Formation.” Mentioned in texts such as the Talmud, the time of its composition is still widely debated. The general consensus, though, is that it predates the most well known Kabbalistic text, the Zohar, by several centuries. The Sefer Yetzirah describes how the universe was created using the numbers one through ten and the twenty two letters of the Hebrew alphabet. The numbers correspond to the ten Sefirot, and this is possibly the earliest mention of them in Jewish literature. The letters of the Hebrew Alphabet were instrumental to the creation of every soul that has ever existed and will ever exist.

Not only is this process of creation, in a sense, timeless, but it is notable that here as well, the physical, the linguistic, and the non-material are intimately connected. The ten sefirot are mirrored by the ten fingers on human hands, and letters as well as the numbers are connected to both natural elements, days of the week, the planets . This includes the good, the bad, and the ugly. There is not a separate adversary, per say, who causes evil to occur. Good and bad qualities are distinguished from one another, but one may be on the same “axis” as the other.

As a metaphysics, this may sound fantastical and overwrought to modern, secular ears. In Jewish literature, there seems to be this implicit permission granted to the use of these quaint hermeneutic methods and documents as ways to get closer to or more aware of what is in the end ineffable. Despite being beset with dualisms, a text as mainstream and central to Judaism as even the Torah could be seen to demonstrate, through narrativity alone, the dissolution of many binaries that turn out to often be false. There is also the interplay between the universal and particular highlighted in mainstream and esoteric texts alike. In Kabbalah, this is exemplified by the dynamic of the supposed antinomy of the ineffable Ayn Sof and the ten emanated sefirot, which, while also deemed ineffable are conversely imbued with descriptive associations.

The Sefer Yetzirah warns against dwelling on or visualizing the Ten Sefirot, but acknowledges that to err is to be human. Thus there is the reassurance that the bedrock of the faith is that of “running and returning.” The journey is not without instances of going astray, but return is always possible. In general, the Sefer Yetzirah is a fine example of a treatise on the parallels between the physical and spiritual realms, with language and mathematics as intermediaries between the two. One thing from one realm mirrors another, and this may allow for imaginative possibilities that could promote our conscious presence in our own corporeality in an increasingly mechanized and automated world.

What relevance does an arcane text like the Sefer Yetzirah have in the current world, so different from that of antiquity? Oddly enough, there are vague parallels between such a text and the most seemingly non-religious, downright blasphemous texts of the past century. One such example is George Bataille’s short essay The Solar Anus. Written in the 1920’s, Bataille’s avant-garde text fits nicely in with the Surrealist milleu with which he associated, before getting “kicked out” by movement leader Andre Breton. Bataille, a writer and philosopher who prized materiality, even, or especially, material things that people were generally repelled by lays out a series of absurd, aphoristic statements. This is what makes up the whole text. From the getgo, statements are uttered that mirror the interconnectedness of creation that a text like the Sefer Yetzirah describes. The first statement parallels it quite well:

“It is clear that the world is purely parodic, in other words, that each thing seen is the parody of another, or is the same thing in a deceptive form.”

Obviously, there is a surface sentiment of mockery both in this statement and the entirety of the text. Bataille writes to blaspheme the whole of the assumed Sacred, but if we are to follow the insight of feminist philosopher Donna Harraway, blasphemy of something is an indication that it is taken serious by the person blaspheming. Bataille takes a concept as general and lofty as the concept of love and connects it to things normally associated that may normally evoke disgust:

“An abandoned shoe, a rotten tooth, a snub nose, the cook spitting in the soup of his masters are to love what a battle flag is to nationality. An umbrella, a sexagenarian, a seminarian, the smell of rotten eggs, the hollow eyes of judges are the roots that nourish love. A dog devouring the stomach of a goose, a drunken vomiting woman, a slobbering accountant, a jar of mustard represent the confusion that serves as the vehicle of love.”

Rabbi Lawrence Kushner posits that unlike Christianity, which concerns itself more with the transcendence of materiality, mystical Judaism seeks to find God everywhere, even in the garbage. Concurrently, Georges Bataille deflates human hubris but finds great beauty and even love in the things that most see as disgusting. Also, The Solar Anus is populated with references that compare coitus, the rotation of the earth, and mechanical rotation, as interdependent parts of the same technology reflected at different levels. Essentially, it’s coitus that makes the world go around, and the world going around allows for coitus to resume. Animal, plant, and machine are part of an ecosystem in which the human-made technologies echo the structure and movement of natural forces. We cannot understand nature, but it may be reflected in the way we try to counter it- it is precisely here that we see paralleling mechanisms.

Stateside, around the same time as the Solar Anus was written, a mystique-laden figure in the blues tradition named Robert Johnson was performing his songs at juke joints across the delta area. Rumored to have acquired his playing ability via a deal with the devil, Johnson’s work stands out as an idiosyncratic expression of the blues form. The lyrics are often heavily metaphorical, expressing desire and desperation characteristic of the blues, but with an added element of imagistic ambiguity. Such is the case with Terraplane Blues, in which Johnson compares the process of remedying sexual disfunction with the process of trying to fix an automobile. Various parts of a car’s construction are used as innuendo for different parts of the body. It is an interesting metaphorical world as, on the one hand, we don’t want to see humans or other animals as “mechanized.” However, acknowledging the sheer materiality and structural nature associated with sexual pleasure is somewhat integral in satisfying one’s partner.

The reason why figures like Georges Bataille and Robert Johnson can be mentioned in the same sentence is that their work appears to be an effort to stay “in the body” even as the world was getting more mechanized. They both are materialists who nonetheless feel the power of what others would deem “the spiritual realm” in the objects of the modern world. Dwelling in brackets that are heretical to an almost sinister extent, they nonetheless document vivid desire while acknowledging the mechanical presence that in early twentieth century was beginning to become more prevalent in some of the world. Consciousness demands a working-through, a constant recurrence of negotiation with what Buber calls the It-World. The I-Thou, though, dwells among the machinery- even if God goes unacknowledged.

If we are to identify language as being intertwined with subjectivity, then we must look to activities such as literature as avenues of navigating life, the world, and the Divine. Although a literary form such as poetry is often assumed to be unpopular and thereby irrelevant to the events of the world, major or minor, there is an argument to be made for its relevance even if its supposed obsolescence proved to be true. Art forms, not divorced from the social, economic, and political contexts in which they are contextualized, can have varying roles across time and place. Obviously, in the mid twentieth century, various art forms were integral to the emergence of assorted countercultural movements.

Robert Duncan was a poet who participated in various literary movements during this time. His singularity in these movements is to be noted; while at the forefront of the avant-garde, he took cues from the poetic tradition across many eras, in addition to the mystical elements of various wisdom traditions. Rather than writing a poem, he perceived himself to be participating in the one great poem written through history. This was an idea he shared with Percy Bysshe Shelley, a poet from the Romantic era. While Romanticism impacted his aesthetic and approach, Duncan was a prominent participant in the mid-century wave of poets who experimented with form, even with the placement of words on the page.

In Duncan’s case, this seemed to be integral to his particular mission as a participant in the “one great poem.” Rather than seeking to impose formal structures that would serve as an interface against a more chaotic world, whether natural or synthetic. Drawing from sources such as process philosophy, Duncan and some of his contemporaries saw nothing in the universe as inert matter; rather, the universe was comprised of a multitude of events. This outlook was reflected particularly in Duncan’s approach to writing, which was characterized by a certain spirit of spontaneity. There was not a recklessness to it, per say, but rather a way in which it mirrored the unpredictable nature of life, whether it be one’s own subjectivity or organic forms of life at large.

Another characteristic of Duncan’s work is its collage-like nature. Duncan felt it was not the poet’s job to create order but instead discover it. Seemingly unrelated fragments emerge in varying spaces on the page, but does this not mirror what’s going on “off the page?” The universe is disjointed, but within this chaos is order which, instead of being a fixed structure, may adapt to the evolving patterns of life. In this sense, while Duncan was greatly driven by the Heraclitean theory that “you never step in the same stream twice,” he also took cues from more recent philosophical developments such as the evolutionism brought forth by Charles Darwin in the nineteenth century. The collage of fragments that comprised his poems mirrored the life in the universe and demonstrated a potential way of interacting with or perceiving whatever comes into our field of consciousness.

It should be noted that in a 1978 lecture at Naropa University, Duncan describes his work as a poet to be located at the juncture of Judaic prophesy, in which messages are to be broadcast if they are received from on high, and Greek poesis, in which things are “made up,” more or less. What is intriguing about the prophetic tradition, however, that books in the Tanakh such as Isaiah seem to have a Duncan-esque quality in them as they may vary from one verse another in style and subject. We see constant jumps in such texts from standard prose, telling the story of warfare and other types of conflict, poetry from a divine source, and of course, allusions to other texts in the Biblical canon. Talmudic scholar Daniel Boyarin brought intertextuality, a subset of literary theory associated with thinkers such as Julia Kristeva, into the study of Jewish texts. In intertextuality, every text ever written is in communication with all of the rest. The great poem whispers across space and time, not just outwardly but amongst itself as well.

III. We are the Cream Simulacra, We Are Emotionless Actors

A spectre is haunting the hearts and minds of many. What is this spectre, though? Is there nostalgia or an empty space in the soul that requires filling? Is the vacancy in one soul indicative of that of the next, or the vacancy in the world’s soul? Whatever the case may be, we see phenomena of the past returning. Care must be taken in comparing the present to the past, though. The present is unique and complex in its own right.

Phenomena rise in a way that they hadn’t before. Reflections dance in many mirrors; cameras record the surface tension but not the sea inside. And the sea inside is lonesome; a whistle or a drone hangs over it and but does not sooth the water’s depths. We’ve clung to odd surfaces, it seems. Politics reflects this, and culture does as well. In the midst of it all stands the figure of Canadian psychologist Jordan Peterson, both revered and scorned. He advises against the embrace of chaos, deeming his recent best-seller an antidote to it. However, he also acknowledges that consciousness itself is an oscillation between order and chaos. For him, chaos is feminine and order is masculine. He alludes to the fact that matter shares the same etymology as “mother,” and also that matter is “what matters” or the “matter at hand.” We need to be well equipped with order in, well, order to face this matter, the material world which encounters us chaotically.

What is matter, that it is so chaotic? Are we not, as Duncan suggests, confronted by hidden order to be discovered in our efforts, be they artistic or otherwise? Perhaps Peterson can see this as well, but unlike Duncan. he strongly makes the case for building order or fighting against a kind of entropy that he sees as being destructive to both the individual and society. Perhaps we can see the truth in that there is an initial chaos in the process of consciousness’ way of assimilating all it is confronted with into order. An initial shock, if you will. Furthermore, in this day and age, perhaps it simply cannot be ignored that culture, politics, and media seem to be a disarray or a cacophony of sorts, amplified by the complex instruments of technology at our disposal.

In his 1981 book Simulacra and Simulation, French theorist Jean Baudrillard proposes that there is such a congestion of signs, symbols, and other types of significance around what actually is, that this has come to replace things as they actually are. The “map” has come to replace the “territory,” according to Baudrillard. This presents a world where not only has a tangled web of signs and symbols superimposed itself the material and social realms of life, but it has also come to be these realms itself. The same goes for the sacred. What we have, then, is a situation in which collections of signs and symbols are a currency in our communication with each other, and thenceforth the stream all media communications swim. There is much information, of course, but actual meaning is scant. This that were once communicative signs and symbols are now signs and symbols for themselves and not something else in reality.

In his book The Coming Community, however, Giorgio Agamben remarks at how consumer culture and capitalism, particularly through the avenue of advertising, has detached something such as the human body from contextual meaning to such an extent that it as also effectively done away with the regressive social mores of the past which placed stigmatization on our bodies and their functions. Similarly, Agamben sees what he views to be the bourgeois state of existence infiltrate all classes of society in a globalized world; there was no more proletariat in regards to “class consciousness,” only a “universal bourgeoisie.” In both of these examples, Agamben sees the danger but also a liberating potential. Perhaps a map superseded the territory, so to speak, in centuries past, just in a way that cut deeper into embodied experience. There is a potential, then, to reclaim awareness of and agency over the “territory,” things in their actuality, due to the simultaneous homogenization and disembodiment of culture across the globe. New possibilities open up.

How does one enter a world in which suppression and liberation can come from the same sources? How is one to interact with such a world? Both Georges Bataille and Jean Baudrillard deem multiple post-Enlightenment humanist projects of trying to apply an ethics or moral code to the world as misguided failures. This is because they are concerned with the non-material, or the realm of spirit. Baudrillard sees capital itself as being divorced from any kind of ethics that would inform Marxism or the liberalism of the eighteenth century seen in philosophies such as that of Rousseau. Bataille, while certainly not rejecting Marx wholesale, sees his contemporaries in the Surrealist movement as having evaded the materialism and highlighting of class struggle crucial to effective revolutionary thought and praxis. Instead, it has turned to high idealism; an evasion of a reality which needs to be communicated with on its own terms- this reality, for Bataille, should be the substance of surrealism. This perspective is reflected in Bataille’s work; things stand in their physicality to be manipulated in often grotesque ways, but none that necessarily exceed the limits of palpable reality.

What is to be said of concepts such as “reason” and “logic?” Do they warrant the same criticism as that which Baudrillard and Bataille criticized as ineffective in the face of capital’s amoral existence? Laboria Cuboniks, a feminist collective of the present day, does not think this is so. In their Xenofeminist Manifesto, published in 2015, they seek to reclaim the domains of “objectivity” and “reason,” particularly in the sciences, from patriarchal domination. Like others of the former century, they caution against a kind of high moralism which divorces revolutionary thought from the reality that it confronts. However, they contend that it crucial for feminism to embrace the evolving technologies that are out there, fully acknowledging both the repressive and liberating qualities thereof. Rather than being driven towards biological determinism, the collective seeks an engagement with the sciences that would give space for the fluidity and unpredictability that arise in the natural and social worlds.

For decades, Rabbi Michael Lerner, a founding editor of Tikkun Magazine, has been making the case for “meaning” to make a re-entry in particular into Leftist politics. For Lerner, there has been a pattern that has been cycling since the early twentieth century. In times of crisis, the Left is good at advocating for economic justice and political rights, but skims past the deeper elements of the crisis and the suffering that exists in its wake. The gap left by this lopsided focus leaves a vacuum in which the Right can entice crowds of people by way of appealing to deeper, more emotional pain that is occurring. People do not feel like the work they do has any meaning, and given this misfortune, would at least prefer to be compensated more for their mindless toil.

On the other hand, there is an internalized desire to move up in the working world, and henceforth adapt the goals that self-help authors in the 1980’s promoted: being as effectively manipulative as possible in your environment. Suddenly, people around you are not valuable as ends in themselves but as means to get what you want. The Right appeals to both the pain of the masses and their subsequent desire to at least move up in this cutthroat world. Of course, as we may see in instances at present, what the Right does is blame this pain on the efforts of people who are at least just as marginalized as the constituency that it attracts. In the face of this, Lerner obliges the Left to look towards the realms of the spiritual and moral again, in order to address the pain that the Right manages to tap into more.

Are these disparate concerns? Those being, the material versus the emotional conditions of life? Perhaps there is a way to approach them with equal care, in the inclination that both constitute the debris that we inevitably face. Perhaps there is merit in compartmentalizing the physical and the non-physical. On the other hand, the qualities that distinguish two things from one another do not negate the possibility of the two things’ interdependence. Perhaps there is a continuous oscillation or cycle that commences. In the words of the Sefer Yetzirah, we are always “running and returning.” And in the words of Georges Bataille, “thus even though terrestrial life moves to the rhythm of this rotation, the image of this movement is not turning earth, but the male shaft penetrating the female and almost entirely emerging, in order to reenter.”

During the primaries of the 2018 midterm elections in this country, UGA professor Richard Winfield ran for U.S. Representative of Georgia’s 10th District. Running as a Democrat, Dr. Winfield utilized his decades-long scholarship in Hegel’s oeuvre and its application to philosophy philosophy to build a bold, progressive platform which distinguished itself from even the more progressive factions of the Democratic party. Inspired by the social rights agenda sponsored by Franklin and Eleanor Roosevelt close to the end of the president’s life, the policies that Winfield proposed were founded upon the idea that without guaranteed jobs at fair wages, life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness were to be inaccessible to the masses. Thus, a Federal Jobs Guarantee was central to his campaign’s platform; politicians in congress, including many Democratic presidential hopefuls for the 2020 general election, subsequently began to endorse this idea. What was unique to Winfield’s proposed jobs guarantee was that it was not merely an effort towards “full employment, but rather a forum for massive societal transformation. Winfield saw that many public goods and services had been gutted over several decades, and that perhaps the Federal Government had the opportunity to foster these goods and services back into existence, along with new ones such as broadband internet access in remote areas. He also envisioned jobs related to teaching and the arts, similar to Franklin Roosevelt’s Works Progress Administration.

Winfield also emphasized economic justice in his campaign for U.S. Representative. For these guaranteed government jobs, he proposed a minimum wage of twenty dollars per hour, and put forth the idea of enforcing mandatory collective bargaining rights in both the public and private spheres of the workforce. Rather than start with the enforcement of living wage in the private sector, he proposed that it could be more effective to institute a livable wage for government jobs, which would put pressure on the private sector to increase their wages. The minimum wage, once secured as a livable wage across the board, would then be adjusted to inflation in subsequent years. Winfield planned to fund programs such as this and others by imposing a two percent income or wealth tax on the top one percent. This, he felt, would eliminate the threat of going into further debt and having to raise taxes on the middle and working classes.

The Federal Jobs Guarantee, according to Winfield, had massive advantages over proposed policies such a Universal Basic Income. The later, he felt, allowed the continued exploitation and underpayment of workers. Also, class division would continue as a Universal Basic Income would still allow for a society of at least two rungs: the ones who were just barely getting by and the ones who had extra capacity for leisure and the pursuit of their passions and interests. The possibility of Winfield’s wide-spanning set of proposals be enforced as policy any time soon in the United States seems a bit slim, and perhaps many would be divided about whether all of these initiatives would help or harm the general state of things. Despite this, when one contemplates the reasons for the enforcement of such policies, we hit upon crucial issues. How can we achieve a balance of work and family life across the wide span of the work force? In a world where many jobs are being outsourced due to automation, how can we work to ensure that humans live meaningful full lives, connected in mind, body, and spirit to their daily activities?

Karl Marx emphasized the need for workers to be connected to their labor in such a way, and this is echoed in Michael Lerner’s observations of middle income earners’ lamentations on the meaninglessness of their jobs. In mind, body, and spirit, though, we always “run and return” from engagement to detachment, and in light of this Laboria Cuboniks’ championing of alienation rather than decrying it in the Xenofeminism Manifesto is fascinating. Daily life is diverse in its feelings and thoughts, and perhaps Hegel would identify various dialectical processes and tensions therein. What is important is not a “utopian” outcome but the allowance of any diversity of possibilities at all. In spite of its self-identification as the land of opportunity, for many, the United States does not quite live up to this title. Whatever process towards whatever outcome that lies before us, whether you call it a Hegelian dialectic or something else, will not be orderly or even pretty. The leveling of power between employer and employee, for example, would be a setting of major difficulties and conflicts; perhaps this goes for negotiations among employees themselves. Whether we see disaster in bold policy proposals or positive transformation, we at least are woken up to not only the variety of possibilities in subjective and collective history, but also to the importance of interpersonal engagement and its relation to personal liberty.

IV. Prolegomena to Whatever

We awaken to a sea, the tides of which are suspended over us.

This does not stop us from drowning,

and the drowning, in turn, does not stop us

from living.

The sea is a whole

and the fragments of the whole contain the same seal-

it blurs and we are left

unsure of what this seal refers to.

But the seal returns-

we call it “zeitgeist,” “vibe,” “era,”

or something that also lets it be a presence

but doesn’t keep it from rising like heat into the air.

“The word UTOPIA by definition signifies “NO PLACE,” writes Taraka Larson of the musical group Prince Rama in the Now Age Manifesto, published in 2011. It is not transcendental nor of this world, it is neither here, nor there. There exists, she posits, a realm called “Hyparxis,” in which the real and the ideal, potential and actuality mingle. This puts Utopia in line with multiple concepts across wisdom traditions, perhaps yet again most noticeably concepts in Judaism and Taoism. As Julia Kristeva notes about the Promised Land in the Tanakh, it is made special due to the fact that the Jews are cut off from it. It always trails behind or looms ahead, and sometimes is inhabited. Yet the cyclical return to and exile from make it that make it so significant. The whole concept of the Now Age, its simultaneous immanence and transcendence, also hearkens back to the concept of the Tao- something we inhabit but cannot grasp.

Abraham Joshua Heschel, in his book The Sabbath, distinguishes Shabbat as the time of the week in which Jews work not within space but rather within time. The linearity that time has during the work week is circumvented. In the Now Age Manifesto, Larson states that the Now Age is something that is not temporally specific or, on the other hand, a manifestation of eternity, but rather “transformations in inner time.” The connection that the Now Age may have in relation to Heschel’s conception of Shabbat’s temporal uniqueness is that neither deny time or eternity as concepts; they are buttressed and receptive to both. Shabbat touches upon the Eternal, but is rigidly situated in temporal duration. Within this duration, though, lies the invitation or even obligation to exist within time as one may not necessarily have the opportunity to during the spatially-focused work week. Larson does not protect the concept of the Now Age from existence in space; she uses her theories of the Now Age and Hyparxis to distinguish her vision of Utopianism from simply a vain hope in a future state of unbreakable equanimity. It is a constant vision of the real and ideal being able to co-exist in one space.

Michael Lerner has a unique interpretation of the the Sh’ma, which is the prayer central to Jewish Tradition. The prayer, in its shortened form, translates into something akin to “Hear, O Israel, the Lord is Our God, the Lord is One. Blessed is His glorious kingdom, forever and ever.” In his book Jewish Renewal: a Path to Healing and Transformation, Lerner distinguishes the two characterizations of God in the first line. While “our God” refers to Elohim, which is related more to God as God is manifest in creation, or God’s immanence, the Lord is One refers to the more transcendent YHWH- this is important as in the story of the Akedah, or when Abraham is commanded by God to sacrifice Isaac, it is Elohim who gives the original order and YHWH who, in a message transmitted by an angel, calls the order off. The Sh’ma is thus, for Lerner, a reconciliation between the immanence and transcendence of God. God’s immanence infuses the real in the form of Elohim, but YHWH is the realm in which the Ideal is possible.

Roberto Mangabeira Unger, a Brazilian-born philosopher and politician, feels we desperately need to break away the concept that history contains a set of “isms” that steadily morphed into one another; this includes systems such as capitalism, socialism, feudalism, and fascism. He stresses that history is a series of conflicts between different factions and interest groups, and through this multiple dialectics are formed that produce syntheses that do not conform orthodoxly to the aforementioned systems. This process-oriented philosophy, is needed, he stresses, in both activism and government. A more experimental model is needed, not to mention one that acknowledges that incremental change is sufficient enough to indicate progress. This, however, may avoid the trademark symbolic concessions that governments may make to various social movements with no subsequent structural change in the economic and political structure of their home country. Unger identifies what he sees to be the main two strands the contemporary Left: one which advocates classic redistributive tax and transfer policies and one which moves along with the current trends of globalization. Unger stresses the need for a third strand to emerge; one which favors experimentation in both market economies and governmental structure.

Behind this need for a third strand of the Left is a deeper, more subjective need in humanity. Unger essentially calls for a revival of the striving towards the realization of the Romantic Subject in each individual being central to social democratic policies. The importance of this is to be realized in innovative, fluid dynamics that involve people in participation in markets. One of the key charges from the Right at the moment towards the Left seems to be that the Left conflates equality of opportunity with equality of outcome. However, the outcome they seem to be referring to is the mere stabilization of one’s economic security. It would be a sad world, though, if economic security was the end all and be all of human existence, the strive towards that security effectively becoming the essential meaning of life. It is through the enforcement of a bare standard of living that individual talents and gifts could shine through in people. While the Right may criticize policies such as Universal Basic Income and a Federal Jobs guarantee as an attempt to bring about uniformity of outcome, the counterpoint is that these would bring about less uniformity of outcome as “realizing your dream” would cease to be such a privilege. At this point, these would seem to be measures that are not utopian pipe dreams, but, in the face of automation and various other changes that may come our way, ways to avoid an unimaginable dystopia.

Roberto Unger takes some of his inspiration from the far-reaching philosophical movement known as Pragmatism. Beginning in the nineteenth century, its original American variant attempted to brake away from the abstraction of analytic philosophy on this side of the Atlantic and the idealism of German philosophers such as Hegel. Making the claim that thought and language are not mere forms of representation of objective reality, the Pragmatists saw them as tools for approaching and affecting reality. William James and John Dewey, key figures in American Pragmatism, rejected determinism, which attempts to prove that certain outcomes, be they of the natural, social, or political world, are predictable due to a fixed nature of things which may be observed through historical patterns. Like the French Symbolist poet Stephane Mallarme who famously proclaimed that “a role of the dice does not abolish chance,” James in particular focused on chance as almost being more supreme than choice in the cosmological makeup of “free will.”

Locating chance outside of fate, James in particular pointed out that chance is the product of multiple factors- factors which, like the universe that contained them, were in flux and not fixative. James also coined the phrase “radical empiricism,” which stressed the interference of individual subjective lenses into observation; both him and Dewey were skeptical of the distinctions that analytic philosophers placed upon the realms of subjectivity and objectivity. Such an approach would come to inform different schools of thought in decades to come, such as contemporary feminism. Calling for a “Radical Pragmatism,” Roberto Unger allows for institutional flexibility, not just flexibility in the content of society. Perhaps this goes in line with Dewey mission of reforming education and fostering participatory democracy- seeing both as processes and not fixed systems.

Pragmatists wanted philosophy to be in touch with whatever outcome it had in the real world, so to speak. What do we face when we face the world? Chaos, calamity, and turmoil seem to be evident, even if in our everyday lives we see people “keeping it together” or keeping a calm face in public. In encountering the world, our perception of ourselves is realigned or reconfigured according to what or whom we may encounter. Like motorists who slow down whenever they come upon a car wreck, we feel repelled and compelled at the very same time by what we encounter. We open our eyes to calamity, and feel replenished as, perhaps, we may feel a sense of relative safety or composure in contrast to what we see.

Julia Kristeva had a name for this: “abjection.” In being confronted with the abject, which could be anything that shocks, repulses, or frightens us, we are thrown away from a secure sense of self. Within the process of this encounter with the abject, that which we call abjection, we find ourselves involved in complex processes of integrating this moment into our experience. Recognizing that this is a process that is intrinsic to life as oxygen, Kristeva has sought, in many forums and disciplines, to hone in on the different causes and outcomes of abjection. From there, she has sought to produce alternative ways of integrating these moments of abjection into our experiences and perspectives.

In considering the connection between language and subjectivity, it is imperative to discuss the way such a connection informs both public and private life. By drawing parallels between the “free association” introduced by Freud into psychiatric cynical practice and the United States’ relationship with the First Amendment, Jill Gentile emphasizes the importance of speech in all spheres of life. She proposes that just as Freud saw the practice of “free association” and speaking as instrumental into a person’s healing, so was “free speech” instrumental to the development and preservation of a democracy. Speech allows for the revelation of the unconscious, and is furthermore an indicator of one’s relationship with one’s unconscious.

Presently there are debates concerning whether hate speech is protected speech. There is a sobering sense one may get that deep down, very few people comprehend or desire free speech. Free speech and free association, argues Gentile, require both cooperation and compromise among people. Acknowledging the power of speech, we may also witness its capacity for preserving and dismantling power structures. Such possibility understandably arouses anxiety in many. However, it does not appear that any monolithic law would suffice for simultaneously mitigating the possible harms that free speech might incur and still allow for the process of institutional, cultural, and social transformation needed to foster equity in the world.

Citing Freud, Gentile asserts that speech uncovers relationships in the unconscious between the present and the past. When we talk about speech outside of psychoanalysis, we do not step outside of a realm where the unconscious is ever-present and influential to what happens. We must understand the weight that things such as ancestral trauma have upon the unconscious, and therefore speech. In this age of tension and uncertainty, we must defend freedom of speech while remaining on the watch for those who use it as a slogan to simply gain disproportionate power and influence- for such people at heart may not believe in free speech at all.

Giorgio Agamben claims that to step into the world of ethics is to step into a world in which fallibility must be recognized. The good is only defined in its relationship to the bad, and ethics demands a recognition of imperfection in the striving for “the good.” Agamben goes on to suggest that God and the good are the mere existence or being-ness of things. That which is is Good in its ever-beckoning indication of what could be. In citing a Hasidic parable, though, Agamben warns against staying too much in the realm of what is, contained by the Shekinah. In the Epistle of James in the New Testament, it is stated that “pure religion consists of caring for the widow and the orphan while not being polluted by the world.” The paradox of going into the world and participating in such help while not be “polluted” by it may be seen to indicate the alternation that is asked of us- by God, the universe, and the world- to preserve ourselves while still venturing into the chaos of the immediate.

1 note · View note

rtfcooperhook · 4 years ago

Text

treasure at tampines appointment

Today, the sacred tantra scripture called Vigyan Bhairav Tantra has been reduced to just one of many meditation manuals. While several amateur adaptations are available online, the original version has never appeared on public domains. With its true essence thus obscured, most will never know the Vigyan Bhairav Tantra actually stood for - and what it does not stand for. Only an experiences tantra teacher can initiate you into its secrets.

True, Vigyan bhairav tantra is an ancient treatise outlining 112 fundamental tantra meditation techniques. However, it is not to be mistaken for a meditation bible, for it explains tantra techniques that do not only train just our minds. Vigyan Bhairav Tantra is a 10,000-year-old tantra scripture meant to catalyze the expansion of consciousness, mind, body and soul.

Tantra is a very practical philosophy, and with ardent practice of this ancient art you can develop a personal spiritual connection with the flow of your life. You can then reach and out tap into the Divinity that exists within you. Vigyan Bhairav Tantra is a holistic approach to life that honors and respects all aspects of your being, including sexuality, love and spirituality. Discover it with a qualified tantra master and you will know wholeness of being like you never thought possible.

An ardent student of tantra would do well do avoid the many so-called 'commentaries' on this fabulous treasure at tampines appointment treatise, which has its deeper meanings inbuilt within the original text in Sanskrit. The Vigyan Bhairav Tantra is not an intellectual or philosophical work that can be absorbed in a retreat or workshop. A qualified tantra teacher can instruct you in its essential teachings to aid you in your tantra lessons, but the complete work required at least a decade and a half to master.

This scripture - one of the most revered in ancient tantra - explains the exact breath techniques Gautama Buddha used to achieve spiritual enlightenment. The Buddha's Vipassana meditation method is well-known for being 'one of His techniques', but it is not generally known that it is based firmly on the Vigyan Bhairav Tantra. Most religious and spiritual schools of the world have borrowed heavily from the various methods and techniques it offers without acknowledging it as their source. For example, Gurdjieff formulated his famous techniques on the lines prescribed by this ancient tantra scripture and introduced them to the West under his own name.

The student of tantra must understand that this ancient treatise is not only about the systematization of breath. Rather, it teaches us to use breath as a technique to bring about pure consciousness. This consciousness is essential if we are to begin exploring the sexual aspects of tantra, which cannot be divorced from deep spirituality. Via the techniques taught by Vigyan Bhairav Tantra, we learn to harness energy that is otherwise wastefully expelled through mundane sexual intercourse. It changes the way we perceive sex. We learn to see it as much more than just a peaking of erotic energy that must be released and then done away with.

0 notes

thepastisalreadywritten · 2 years ago

Text

SAINT OF THE DAY (June 1)

"We are slain with the sword, but we increase and multiply; the more we are persecuted and destroyed, the more are deaf to our numbers. As a vine, by being pruned and cut close, shoots forth new suckers, and bears a greater abundance of fruit; so is it with us."

– St. Justin Martyr

Justin was born around the year 100 in the Palestinian province of Samaria, the son of Greek-speaking parents whose ancestors were sent as colonists to that area of the Roman Empire.

Justin's father followed the Greek pagan religion and raised his son to do the same, but he also provided Justin with an excellent education in literature and history.

Justin was an avid lover of truth, and as a young man, became interested in philosophy and searched for truth in the various schools of thought that had spread throughout the empire.

But he became frustrated with the professional philosophers' intellectual conceits and limitations, as well as their apparent indifference to God.

After several years of study, Justin had a life-changing encounter with an old man who questioned him about his beliefs and especially about the sufficiency of philosophy as a means of attaining truth.

He urged him to study the Jewish prophets and told Justin that these authors had not only spoken by God's inspiration, but also predicted the coming of Christ and the foundation of his Church.

“Above all things, pray that the gates of life may be opened to you,” the old man told Justin, “for these are not things to be discerned, unless God and Christ grant to a man the knowledge of them.”

Justin had always admired Christians from a distance because of the beauty of their moral lives.

As he writes in his Apologies:

"When I was a disciple of Plato, hearing the accusations made against the Christians and seeing them intrepid in the face of death and of all that men fear, I said to myself that it was impossible that they should be living in evil and in the love of pleasure.”

The aspiring philosopher eventually decided to be baptized around the age of 30.

After his conversion, Justin continued to wear the type of cloak that Greek culture associated with the philosophers.

Inspired by the dedicated example of other Catholics whom he had seen put to death for their faith, he embraced a simple and austere lifestyle even after moving to Rome.

Justin was most likely ordained a deacon. Since he preached, he did not marry. He also gave religious instruction in his home.

He is best known as the author of early apologetic works, which argued for the Catholic faith against the claims of Jews, pagans, and non-Christian philosophers.

Several of these works were written to Roman officials, for the purpose of refuting lies that had been told about the Church.

Justin sought to convince the rulers of the Roman Empire that they had nothing to gain, and much to lose, by persecuting the Christians.

His two most famous apologetical treatises were "Apologies" and "Dialogue with Tryphon."

In order to fulfill this task, Justin gave explicit written descriptions of the early Church's beliefs and its mode of worship.

In modern times, scholars have noted that Justin's descriptions correspond to the traditions of the Catholic Church on every essential point.

Justin describes the weekly Sunday liturgy as a sacrifice. He speaks of the Eucharist as the true body and blood of Christ.

He further states that only baptized persons who believe the Church's teachings, and are free of serious sin, may receive it.

Justin also explains in his writings that the Church regards celibacy as a sacred calling, condemns the common practice of killing infants, and looks down on the accumulation of excessive wealth and property.

His first defense of the faith, written to Emperor Antonius Pius around 150, convinced the emperor to regard the Church with tolerance.

In 167, however, persecution began again under Emperor Marcus Aurelius.

During that year, Justin wrote to the emperor, who was himself a philosopher and the author of the well-known “Meditations.”

He tried to demonstrate the injustice of the persecutions and the superiority of the Catholic faith over Greek philosophy.

Justin emphasized the strength of his convictions by stating that he expected to be put to death for expressing them.

He was, indeed, seized along with a group of other believers and brought before Rusticus, prefect of Rome.

A surviving eyewitness account shows how Justin the Philosopher became known as “St. Justin Martyr.”

The prefect made it clear how Justin might save his life:

“Obey the gods and comply with the edicts of the emperors.”

Justin responded that “no one can be justly blamed or condemned for obeying the commands of our Savior Jesus Christ.”

Rusticus briefly questioned Justin and his companions regarding their beliefs about Christ and their manner of worshiping God. Then he laid down the law.

“Hear me,” he said, “you who are noted for your eloquence, who think that you make a profession of the right philosophy. If I cause you to be scourged from head to foot, do you think you shall go to heaven?”

“If I suffer what you mention,” Justin replied, “I hope to receive the reward which those have already received, who have obeyed the precepts of Jesus Christ.”

“There is nothing which we more earnestly desire, than to endure torments for the sake of our Lord Jesus Christ,” he explained. “We are Christians, and will never sacrifice to idols.”

Justin was scourged and beheaded along with six companions who joined him in his confession of faith.

St. Justin Martyr has been regarded as a saint since the earliest centuries of the Church.

Eastern Catholics and Eastern Orthodox Christians also celebrate his feast day on June 1.

0 notes

jamesgraybooksellerworld · 4 years ago

Text

281J Early 15th century Homiliary

{Homiliarius doctorum qui omiliarius dici solet … Hieronymi Augustini, Ambrosii, Jo. Chrysostomi, Gregorii, Origenis, Bede et complures ..}?

St Augustine (354- 430), John Christomos (349-407) St Benedict , Pope Leo I(440-61) ( and others)

For this collection of Homilies, who was the editor is not certain, and while traditionally it is attributed to Paul the Deacon approximately 720-799 There is also supposition that it was collected by Alcuin or even Bede.

What we do know is that the production of Homiliary began in the 780s when Charlemagne (742/743–814) appointed Paul the Deacon to compose a Homiliary. Charlemagne,” has been represented as the sponsor or even creator of medieval education, and the Carolingian renaissance has been represented as the renewal of Western culture. This renaissance, however, built on earlier episcopal and monastic developments, and, although Charlemagne did help to ensure the survival of scholarly traditions in a relatively bleak and rude age, there was nothing like the general advance in education that occurred

later with the cultural awakening of the 11th and 12th centuries. Learning, nonetheless, had no more ardent friend than Charlemagne, who came to the Frankish throne in 768 distressed to find extremely poor education systems” [EB] “Charlemagne stands out as the personification of everything that is unselfish and noble, a conqueror who visualized himself as the champion of European unity with the purpose of saving Europe through imperial conquest—an evangelist with a sword. As it turns out, Charlemagne did see himself as the Conqueror of everything pagan and heterodox and the divinely destined builder of Augustine’s City of God—of “one God, one emperor, one pope, one city of God.”[2] It was as if Charlemagne consciously sought to fulfill Plato’s vision of the ideal philosopher king. After all, Europe badly needed a conquering strong man like David of old, who could exercise wisdom and discernment in the sustainment of God’s new Jerusalem on earth.” [Gregory W. Hamilton ;http://nrla.com/charlemagne-and-the-vision-of-a-christian-empire/]N

So, We do know that ” From a very early time the Homilies of the Fathers were in high esteem, and were read in connection with the recitation of the Divine Office. That the custom was as old as the sixth century we know since St. Gregory the Great refers to it, and St. Benedict mentions it in his rule (Pierre Batiffol, History of the Roman Breviary, 107). This was particularly true of the homilies of Pope St. Leo I, very terse and peculiarly suited to liturgical purposesThis particular Homilarium Begins [folio cxli] with Ambrose (340-397) Homilies for the Quadragesima (forty days of Lent -Yes lent is longer than 40 days even though there are more 40 days from Ash Wednesday to Easter. ( counting the days of Lent excluding its Sundays and the Sacred Triduum, which technically is a separate sacred time.) This takes up to folio 224 (cclxxiiii). Following St Ambrose who has iv sermons in this section are sermons by Origen, Bede , John Chrystosom Cyrill , Augustine , Peter Chrysologus Archbishop of Ravenna , Alcuin of York .

After the Quadragesima series begins the Homilies for The Passion of Christ (Holy Week) On Palm Sunday, Jesus and his disciples spent the night in Bethany, a town about two miles east of Jerusalem. This is where Lazarus, whom Jesus had raised from the dead, and his two sisters, Mary and Martha lived. They were close friends of Jesus, and probably hosted Him and His disciples during their final days in Jerusalem.

This section (folios 141-245 )of Homilies begins at Quadragesima see above.

Then Holy Week/Passione homilies occupy folios 246-312.

Augustine of Hippo (13 November 354 – 28 August 430 AD) ,Gregory (3 September 590 to 12 March 604 AD) , Pope Leo (440-416 AD), Chrystomos (347–407)

Next in course is Palm Sunday “Dominica in ramis palmarum folios 313-337

Abbot Bernard (1090-1153), Pope Leo (440–461), Cyprian (200-258) , Chrystomos(347-407) Ambrose: (c339-397)

The final leaf is Easter Saturday (Sabbato sancto pasche)

Probably the first 140 leaves made up Homiletic commentaries on the Old Testament: the Hexaemeron (Six Days of Creation); De Helia et ieiunio (On Elijah and Fasting); De Iacob et vita beata (On Jacob and the Happy Life); De Abraham; De Cain et Abel; De Ioseph (Joseph); De Isaac vel anima (On Isaac, or The Soul); De Noe (Noah); De interpellatione Iob et David (On the Prayer of Job and David); De patriarchis (On the Patriarchs); De Tobia (Tobit); Explanatio psalmorum (Explanation of the Psalms); Explanatio symboli (Commentary on the Symbol).

Saint Augustine:

Peter Chrysologus:

(c. 380 – c. 450) Archbishop of Ravenna, approximately 400-450 , The earliest printed work by Chrysologus is 1575 Insigne et pervetvstvm opvs homiliarum.He is known as the “Doctor of Homilies” for the concise but theologically rich reflections he delivered during his time as the Bishop of Ravenna. His surviving works offer eloquent testimony to the Church’s traditional beliefs about Mary’s perpetual virginity, the penitential value of Lent, Christ’s Eucharistic presence, and the primacy of St. Peter and his successors in the Church. Few details of St. Peter Chrysologus’ biography are known. He was born in the Italian town of Imola in either the late fourth or early fifth century, but sources differ as to whether this occurred around 380 or as late as 406.

John Chrystosom

Beyond Chrstostoms preaching, the other lasting legacy of John is his influence on Christian liturgy. Two of his writings are particularly notable. He harmonized the liturgical life of the Church by revising the prayers and rubrics of the Divine Liturgy, or celebration of the Holy Eucharist. To this day, Eastern Orthodox and Eastern Catholic Churches of the Byzantine Rite typically celebrate the Divine Liturgy of Saint John Chrysostom as the normal Eucharistic liturgy, although his exact connection with it remains a matter of debate among experts.

Saint Cyrill.

Cyril’s jurisdiction over Jerusalem was expressly confirmed by the First Council of Constantinople (381), at which he was present. At that council he voted for acceptance of the term homoousios,(“consubstantial” this term was later also applied to the Holy Spirit in order to designate it as being “same in essence” with the Father and the Son. Those notions became cornerstones of theology in Nicene Christianity, and also represent one of the most important theological concepts within the Trinitarian doctrinal understanding of God) having been finally convinced that there was no better alternative. Cyril’s writings are filled with the loving and forgiving nature of God which was somewhat uncommon during his time period. Cyril fills his writings with great lines of the healing power of forgiveness and the Holy Spirit, like “The Spirit comes gently and makes himself known by his fragrance. He is not felt as a burden for God is light, very light. Rays of light and knowledge stream before him as the Spirit approaches. The Spirit comes with the tenderness of a true friend to save, to heal, to teach, to counsel, to strengthen and to console”. Cyril himself followed God’s message of forgiveness many times throughout his life. This is most clearly seen in his two major exiles where Cyril was disgraced and forced to leave his position and his people behind. He never wrote or showed any ill will towards those who wronged him. Cyril stressed the themes of healing and regeneration in his catechesis. the well-known Catechetical Lectures of St. Cyril of Jerusalem, to explain them to the catechumens during the latter part of Lent

Holy God, you gather the whole universe into your radiant presence and continually reveal your Son as our Savior. Bring healing to all wounds, make whole all that is broken, speak truth to all illusion, and shed light in every darkness, that all creation will see your glory and know your Christ. Amen.

St. Gregory the Great (ca. 540-604).

Alcuin of York : Flaccus Albinus Alcuinus; c. 735 – 19 May 804 AD)—also called Ealhwine, Alhwin or Alchoin—was an English scholar, clergyman, poet and teacher from York, Northumbria. He was born around 735 and became the student of Archbishop Ecgbert at York. At the invitation of Charlemagne, he was a leading scholar and teacher at the Carolingian court, where he remained a figure in the 780s and ’90s.

Alcuin wrote many theological and dogmatic treatises, as well as a few grammatical works and a number of poems. He was made Abbot of Tours in 796, where he remained until his death. “The most learned man anywhere to be found”, according to Einhard‘s Life of Charlemagne (ca. 817-833), he is considered among the most important architects of the Carolingian Renaissance. Among his pupils were many of the dominant intellectuals of the Carolingian era

Origen :Origen of Alexandria ( c. 184 – c. 253)

Origen, most modest of writers, hardly ever alludes to himself in his own works; but Eusebius has devoted to him almost the entire sixth book of “Ecclesiastical History”. Eusebius was thoroughly acquainted with the life of his hero; he had collected a hundred of his letters; in collaboration with the martyr Pamphilus he had composed the “Apology for Origen”; he dwelt at Caesarea where Origen’s library was preserved, and where his memory still lingered; if at times he may be thought somewhat partial, he is undoubtedly well informed. We find some details also in the “Farewell Address” of St. Gregory Thaumaturgus to his master, in the controversies of St. Jerome and Rufinus, in St. Epiphanius (Haeres., LXIV), and in Photius (Biblioth. Cod. 118).

An early fifteenth century manuscript Homiliary 281J Early 15th century Homiliary {Homiliarius doctorum qui omiliarius dici solet ... Hieronymi Augustini, Ambrosii, Jo. Chrysostomi, Gregorii, Origenis, Bede et complures ..}?

#Alcuin #Charlemagne #early 15th century #Homilies #Medieval manuscript #medieval philosophy #St Ambrose #St Augustine #St Bernard #Venerable Bede

0 notes

largemaxa · 4 years ago

Text

Karmayoga: the Yoga of Spiritual Work

There are several discernible threads in current thinking about spirituality in mainstream Western culture. The most prominent views spirituality as a set of tools to provide peace, healing, and relief in a stressful world. This line of thinking is able to bridge the sacred and the secular by allowing individuals to participate in a variety of practices to access their beneficial effects without necessarily needing to affirm (or deny) any particular contentious metaphysical or religious doctrine. Another trend that is more submerged, though correspondingly more passionate, views spirituality as a gateway to beautiful and ecstatic possibilities, whether situated in a transformed utopian future or in an occult inner world. In addition to these two currents, the idea of devotion still persists, though it is viewed with skepticism by a scientific and secular mainstream culture for its associations with fanaticism and irrationality. Love is, of course, regarded as the noblest motive in human life, but only as long as it refers to the love of man for his fellow man in the institutions of the family, community, and society; the love for God seems less reasonable, though still persists in private, if nowhere else.

But somehow, despite the large swath of human possibilities these approaches cover, none of them truly seem able to deal with life. And since spirituality must deal with life if we are to take it seriously in our practical civilization, we half suspect that spirituality is not really meant to deal with life, and is restricted to the realm of the ideal along with art and philosophy: something that is fit for idealists and dreamers, but is not really suited for those who are serious, rational, and pragmatic. Inner peace is perhaps an appealing dream, but how many of us are really able to feel it in the midst of the stresses of our lives? "Healing" may be necessary as well, but it does not provide a guide to constructing life. Ecstatic visions may enthrall, but so far they seem to have had no substantial effect on the outside world. And love for God, too, might be felt in the privacy of one's room, but is it really reconcilable with the skyscraper, the long commute, and the subway?

For most of us, the bulk of experience of life remains impermeable to the spiritual touch. And, perhaps not coincidentally, that substantial portion of experience consists largely of work. The ideas of peace, vision, and love have very little to say about this part of our lives, except gesturing vaguely at the fact that they need to be brought to the bustle of the work world somehow. Still, even that much is an admission that the principles themselves are not the *essence* of work, but foreign principles that somehow need to be added to the realm of work. In other words, if the main principles of spirituality are limited to peace, vision, and love, then there is nothing spiritual about the sales receipt, the shovel, or the medivac helicopter staffed by EMTs. But these things comprise the majority of our familiar world.

In the world of business, political affairs, labor, medicine, there there's no peace, there is no love, there is no ecstasy—so there is no spirit. But if we believe this then we have already ceded the world away to the mundane, and so spirituality really must be incompatible with the totality of life. To those of us who believe in a world-affirming spirituality, this can only mean that there must be an error somewhere in our views. In fact, there is another venerable spiritual practice known as karmayoga that can easily incorporate all the activities listed above, and many more—all of the activities of the world—in a practice that affirms and redeems the seemingly mundane realm that we spend so much time in.

What is Karmayoga?

Stated simply, karmayoga is the practice of offering one's work to the Divine, with no demand, desire, or claim of the ego. Karmayoga can consist of the offering of any work at all, whether streetsweeping, giving metaphysical discourses, exploring the nature of the stars, or teaching school; the only requirement is that the work done should correspond to one's individual nature, with no type of work or psychological nature being regarded as greater or less than another. The work done for karmayoga may even be work that is not remunerative because of the current standards and practices of society, such as parenting, art, or volunteer work. Through the practice of karmayoga, our personality (or "outer nature") becomes purified of egoic blocks, or samskaras, that prevent the union of the soul with the Divine. The outer nature also becomes able to express more intense and more refined energies of the Divine. In short, one increasingly becomes an instrument of God.

To those with the right opening or receptivity—perhaps because they grew up with cultural influence like the Bhagavad Gita's gospel of karmayoga or the Western Protestant work-ethic, or simply because they have an intuitive understanding of the workings of the Divine—this suggestion alone is able to open the gates to a lifetime of practice. Those individuals will be able to take this simple, straightforward advice and use it to take their daily work and consecrate it to God based on this simple formulation, and have no need of further explanation.

On the other hand, the description above may not seem so straightforward to others. To some, it may appear that the description makes sense as a theory, but not as a concrete path of spiritual practice. To others, the description of karmayoga may seem pointless and unappealing. Then there are those with a tendency towards philosophy or metaphysics to whom the process described above will perhaps not seem straightforward at all, leaving open many questions and the possibility of subtleties and complications. This article is aimed at any of these groups of people, and more generally at anyone interested in gaining a deeper understanding of karmayoga. We will ask a set of practical questions: how does one do karmayoga? And why should it be chosen over the other practices of peace and prayer that are more familiar as routes to God? We will also ask deeper questions that will require a dive into the metaphysics and psychology of yoga: what exactly is work, and why would God care if I do it? And what exactly is the mechanism of karmayoga? But before going into the main discussion, I will briefly explain where these ideas come from.

A Note About Intellectual Lineage

Karmayoga is a spiritual practice originating in the Indian subcontinent. In India, practices which aim at the union of the soul with the divine are known as yogas, and karmayoga is the branch of yoga that deals with karma, the concept of action and consequence. While similar spiritual, religious, and philosophical doctrines pertaining to work and action may have arisen in other traditions, I will be discussing this one that I am familiar with, without discounting the possibility of truth or value in any other philosophies of work and action. I am most influenced by the presentation of karmayoga in the work of Anglo-Indian philosopher and yogi Sri Aurobindo. He was influenced in turn by the great Indian scripture which many regard as the chief gospel of karmayoga, the Bhagavad Gita. However, Sri Aurobindo's ideas are not the same as the Gita's, not least because, as he notes in his treatise Essays on the Gita, there is no way for anyone to know if their interpretation agrees with the "truth" of a text that is many centuries old.

Following the same principle, my own interpretation of karmayoga is influenced by my own personal experiences and eclectic intellectual background. In particular, this work is not meant to be an interpretation or exegesis of either the Gita or of Sri Aurobindo; there is every reason to consult these great authorities firsthand, and I would even defer to their understanding and presentation over my own in the case of any discrepancy. I will use general terms from the Indian philosophical tradition and define them as I go. However, throughout the long history of the Indian philosophical tradition, these terms have been used with varying degrees of consistency, and the reader may find varying degrees of consistency between my use and that of others.

I have tried to explain the theory of karmayoga in a way that may be compatible with spiritual systems beyond the one that I myself practice, the Integral Yoga of Sri Aurobindo. Indeed, karmayoga has been practiced in India for millennia, long before the work of Sri Aurobindo, and it doesn't require his specific spiritual system to explain it. Still, it is difficult to make statements that apply to all possible metaphysical systems that the reader may hold without actually doing metaphysical inquiry, and this is not primarily a work of metaphysics. If this exposition conflicts with the reader's metaphysics in a way that renders the article unusable, then I would encourage him or her to seek other sources or other practices. Still, I hope there may be something here that is useful. I add all this to acknowledge my debts and to make my perspective clear.

Karmayoga as a Path for Modern Life

Earlier in this article, I introduced karmayoga as an approach to spirituality that can deal with more parts of life than other currently prominent paths and practices. What is it, specifically about the structure and values of contemporary life that make karmayoga especially well suited to them? First, let's consider a traditional view on selecting a spiritual path. Aspirants to yoga, or spiritual practice, are encouraged to find a yogic practice that corresponds to their fundamental nature. Just as life works best when we choose our friends, occupation, living situation, and forms of entertainment like music so that they correspond to our inmost preferences and tendencies, so it is with spiritual practice: spiritual practice proceeds best when people choose practices that comport well with their own nature rather than causing deep-seated conflicts. Three major paths of yoga presented in the spiritual synthesis of the Bhagavad Gita are karmayoga, the yoga of work, bhakti yoga, the yoga of devotion, and jnana yoga, the yoga of knowledge. An approximate personality typology could be used to divide people into three general types: those with an active, willful nature, such as businessmen, athletes, and artisans; those with great emotional sensitivity, such as artists, teachers who work with young children, and therapists; and those with a sagely, serene nature as found in seekers of philosophical wisdom. This very approximate personality typology applied in a naive way might advise the active-natured people to undertake karmayoga, the emotional people to undertake bhaktiyoga, and the sagely ones to undertake jnanayoga.

But there is another factor that is neglected in this traditional analysis: the overall aim of the spiritual path. The word yoga applies to all practices which aim towards union with the Divine. But there is a further distinction to make between yogic paths: some yogic paths are world-affirming while others are ascetic, or world-denying. By "world-affirming yoga", I refer to spiritual paths which affirm a divine purpose in human life and aim towards harmonizing spiritual realization with continued life in the world. Ascetic paths, on the other hand, seek release from worldly life in some principle such as pure Divine realization, an otherworldly plane of heaven, or negation of Nirvana. This description of ascetic paths may seem pejorative given the strongly world-affirming character of Western civilization, but suffice it to say that there are compelling philosophical and spiritual justifications for the ascetic path. That said, the practice of the author and thus the perspective of this article are world-affirming.

The practice of karmayoga is valuable in both world-affirming and ascetic paths. However, there is another layer of justification for karmayoga in the world-affirming path, which is relevant because it is likely that most readers will have a world-affirming attitude. Karmayoga is still a valid spiritual practice in the context of an ascetic spiritual path because it can assist the practitioner in reaching the goal of union with God. For the ascetic, after achieving this union, for the duration of the life of the body, the individual may retire from action, and there is no further need or justification for karmayoga or any action whatsoever. The role of karmayoga in this system is simply as a method for achieving that liberation, and has no further or greater purpose. In other words, the reason to pursue the karmayoga on an ascetic path is mainly if it is the trend of your nature; and for those who are on the ascetic path, it is also perfectly fine NOT to practice karmayoga if you do not have an active nature.

But karmayoga becomes almost necessary in an world-affirming path because here the ultimate aim is to perfect the outer side of life in line with the Divine Will and not just to secure release of the inner spirit. A world-affirming spirituality holds that outward human life—which consists of actions taken within the world—has a purpose and meaning of its own. This means that firstly, in the world-affirming path one will still act in the world both before and after any given spiritual realization. Further, the actions taken in the world-affirming spiritual path would ideally be actions that reflect God, or the Divine spirit, and not actions that reflect only the desires of the lower ego. But the state of acting from a perfect spiritual basis is, in fact, the end state of the practice of karmayoga: the practitioner of karmayoga eventually reaches a perfection where the force of the divine moves through the purified being which is not obstructed by egoic samskaras. In other words, karmayoga is the exactly the spiritual path that aims at increasing the ability of the individual to take actions that reflect the divine spirit and not the desires of the ego. So karmayoga is, in a sense, essential to the world-affirming spiritual path, in contrast to the ascetic spiritual path, where karmayoga is just one optional means to an end.

A question arises: would it not be possible to secure an inner spiritual liberation and perfection, perhaps through devotion or meditation, before taking up karmayoga in the outer being? For perhaps even in the world-affirming path it would be better to concentrate one's full energy on achieving inner spiritual perfection first, given the difficulty of even securing this level of realization, without throwing too much energy out in worldly activity in a stumbling attempt towards karmayoga; perhaps one could learn to take divinely inspired actions after first achieving an inward spiritual perfection. The issue with this approach is that the inner spiritual realizations themselves do not confer any special ability for karmayoga on the outer nature. The outer nature has many difficulties of its own which inwardly directed spiritual practices do not affect, such as the difficulties inherent in building skill in any particular craft or discipline, the ability to continue acting in stressful situations, the ability to deal with other people in work, and so on—in short, the entire dynamic nature of outer human life. If one plans to have a world-affirming spiritual practice at all, the difficulties of karmayoga will need to be faced anyway as the outer being needs to be prepared to act in ways that reflect the Divine. Further, it may be difficult to return to action or outer development after a period of total or relative cessation of activity. Therefore it's best to pursue a parallel approach, keeping a balance between the inner and outer development, though admitting the possibility of the need for periods of exclusive spiritual absorption and attempting to create a life that is flexible in response to the needs of the spirit.

The practicalities of modern life present another consideration. In today's world, it is generally necessity to do some form of work to survive in society. The debate over the value of ascetic withdrawal from the world still poses a crucial philosophical question, but it had a special salience when actual complete withdrawal was more possible. In ancient India, there was a tradition of sanyassi, or renunciation, in which an individual could abandon all responsibilities to family and society and wander the land, satisfying basic needs by begging, thus creating a life that expressed the philosophical principle of ascetic withdrawal. This is significantly more difficult, if not actually impossible, in the current more regulated state of the modern world. At that earlier societal stage, the tradition of sanyassi found a basis of support in the cultural tradition of donating to the sanyassi, whereas today begging as a means of subsistence is restricted to a homeless underclass with an extremely dangerous dangerous life. As a society, we should of course figure out the political accommodations needed to address the unnecessary human suffering due to homelessness. But the point with regard to the possibility of spiritual seeking is that there is simply no "reasonable" mechanism for withdrawing from the world as there used to be. So for most people, work of some kind is needed to persist in society, and debates about withdrawal from the world have mostly theoretical significance. The need for work to survive means that there are many hours every week which cannot be used for solitary meditation or contemplation. The practice of karmayoga then becomes a way to take the substantial amount of energy devoted to the maintenance of life in modern society and transmute it so that it may support, rather than detract from, our spiritual progress.

We see that there is a strong case for karmayoga for contemporary spiritual practitioners because of its compatibility with world-affirming values, or at the very least because it makes the best spiritual use of the present conditions. But no matter how much work is done in the bustle of the post-industrial economy, the home, or the halls of power, it will not yield spiritual benefits if is done with merely conventional motives, no matter how much benefit it gives to the rest of the world. For a spiritual seeker to make the most of the energies they use in the world, therefore, it would be best for them to understand how to do karmayoga so that they can do their work in a spiritual way. But this spiritual conception of work that does not weigh its utilitarian value seems at odds with the conventional understanding of work where concrete benefits and results are the only thing that counts. Are we really talking about the same thing when we talk about "work" in the spiritual and conventional contexts? What exactly is "work" in this spiritual conception, and how does it square with the conventional idea of work?

What is Work?

To understand what work is in its deepest spiritual significance, we need to go back to our fundamental understanding of the world; we need to understand what the world is if we are to understand the function and nature of work in its proper context. One view of the universe that has long been present in Indian thought, and is echoed by contemporary spiritual thought, is the view of the created universe as made up of "energy", which means that the world is not made up of a fundamentally inert and value-neutral substance, as in the scientific conception of matter, but rather is made of a flux and interchange of forces with various degrees of consciousness and quality. When we look at the physical world, we see a constant collision of physical energies—tides, volcanoes, gases, and the formation of stars. When we look at the living world, too, we see systems of energetic interchange. All forms of life require energy (again, in the physical, scientific sense) to survive and carry out their activities. Plants convert electromagnetic energy from the sun into storable chemical energy, then use that to grow their bodies and reproduce. Animals ingest energy from eating plant or other animal life and use the energy for locomotion, predation, self-defense, and reproduction. The science of ecology shows us a circle of life where the activities of each organism produce, in addition to securing the energy resources and nutrient needed for that organism, produce byproducts that are used as inputs for other organisms in the system.

In the language of Indian philosophy, we can say that each organism acts according to its svadharma, its own law of being, or way of acting according to its own nature. Because the actions of plants and animals are fixed within a delimited range, it's apparent that each one has its own svadharma. We may not be able to predict its exact movements or destinations, we may not be able to fully understand the meanings or purposes of the actions, and there are countless organisms and ways of behaving that are still unknown to the human mind, but we have enough knowledge to know that the activities of, say, the chimpanzee generally consist of foraging for fruits and leaves, fighting other chimpanzees, and so on. It would not be within the svadharma of a chimpanzee to build an anthill, ride a motorcycle, or change colors like an octopus.

Notice that just because a plant or animal has a certain nature or way of being does not necessarily mean that it is effortless to carry out. While the nature of plant consciousness may be beyond the imagination of most humans, we can imagine some aspects of animal consciousness through analogy with our own experience. Though an act of imagination, we can see that the process of hunting for prey, evading predators, or foraging for fruit and leaves might be difficult for an animal, leading eventually to a feeling of fatigue. The animal's activity can be seen as having a structure that resembles some aspects of the structure of human work: there is an expenditure of energy structured according to the animal's own nature, or svadharma, directed towards the purpose of its continued existence. Though the animal of course does not have the conceptual structures in place to recognize it as "work", an imaginative experiment could show similarities between the human and animal experience.

Humans are also part of this energetic universe—they, too, can be seen as structures that seek, consume, and transform energy. Like other animals, they ingest energy from eating plant or animal life, which is broken down and absorbed by the digestive system, then used for locomotion, predation, self-defense, and reproduction. However, human activity is much broader in scope than the activities of other animals. The characteristic difference between humans and animals is the ability to use rational intelligence to decide upon and execute its actions and activities. The Western philosophical tradition which descended from Aristotle identified man as the animal rationale, while the Indian philosophical tradition identified the buddhi, the principle of intelligent will, as an important faculty of mind that was not present in the animal nature.

The rational intelligence can be seen as the critical factor that differentiates the human from the animal nature. Beyond identifying that man *has* a rational intelligence, however, it is very difficult to identify a positive definition for the essential nature or svadharma of the human being. Inquiries into what is a "natural" way, a "right" way, or a "good" way—or even a *possible* way for a human to act have been conducted for millennia, and we are still disputing the answers. Is it good for a human to grow hair down to their waist? Is it natural for a human to consume food that was mass-produced in a factory rather than being prepared from farm-fresh ingredients? Is it possible for human society to subsist on Mars, or is it the essential nature man to dwell on his home planet, Earth?

Luckily, we don't need to circumscribe the scope of human action at all, or prescribe any correct actions, for this inquiry into the discipline of spiritual work. It's enough to simply look at the human condition, the range of activities that humans generally engage in, as the scope of human nature. Rather than focusing on exotic or perverse extremes of human nature, since our view is to understand the nature of work in general, it suffices to consider the main stream of human activity. Human activity includes, but is not limited to, scientific inquiry, development of various kinds of technology, from metallurgy to navigation to computer and information technology, creation of artworks in various media like painting, carving, and music, teaching, parenting, farming, architecting and constructing buildings, and so on.

Each of these tasks is performed with a particular goal in mind. The teacher teaches with the goal of instructing the students; the parent sets limits, instructs, and punishes when necessary with the goal of raising the child into a responsible and fulfilled adult; the information technology worker constructs an application to enable the government or corporation to access its records in an automated way. That is, the activities of a human are directed towards specific ends just as the activities of the animal are directed towards specific ends. One key difference between human and animal work, however, is that human work is more complex in the structure of its purpose: animal activity generally procures energy or self-defense directly, or at most through a small number of layers of social organization, while humans work is generally removed by several layers of social organization from the larger ends, and the larger ends may be goals that are morally higher than the simple furnishing and maintenance of bodily necessities. For example, a teacher teaching history to a class of students is not doing work that will directly procure food for himself or herself or for the students. It could be argued that learning history will lead to increased respect for the nation's political system, bolstering the capacity for national defense, but, firstly, this is not a guaranteed consequence, and secondly, there would still be many intermediate consequential steps and several layers of complex organization separating the work of teaching from the actual act of national defense.

With these observations, we have in view a general conception of human work and its relation to the forces at work in the universe—or, for those who are more metaphysically skeptical, the above discussion hopefully at least provides a fruitful analogy. That said, it is still difficult to give a positive definition of human work that covers all cases. One general principle that we can give is that work is the application of psychological energy towards a task. If we consider the fact that there is no abstract or general work, but that work always occurs within a specific context or situation, we can clarify that general principle further to the idea that work is energy applied towards a task with a particular purpose, the nature of which is made clear from the context. Consider the concrete situation of a community grade school. In this school, the work of the teacher is to give the lectures and give feedback on the students' work, the work of the janitor is to clean the buildings so that the building is sanitary and clean, and the work of the principal is to see to organizational matters in the school and to dialogue with the broader community. In the conventional definition of work, the list would end here with the remunerative jobs held by adults with formally defined adult responsibilities. However, in the broader definition of "work" that we have been developing, we see that there are further relevant contributions to the school considered as a system of energetic interchange from the children, who concentrate on their studies and do exercises in and out of the classroom to solidify their knowledge, and parents, who provide a safe environment for the children, assist them with their studies, and help them get to and from the school.

Another general characteristic of human work is that it causes some sort of constructive transformation in the world. The work of a person cleaning their room or house transforms a state of dirtiness and disorder into a state of cleanliness and order; the work of the scholar producing a research report transforms a state of human ignorance and disorganized data and source material to a state of knowledge in a form that can be communicated to the relevant audience. In the Indian conception of the universe, even destruction can serve a purpose in a larger construction—there are cases where the breakdown of an old societal order, or even war, may be necessary to bring about a new or more just state of order. This example is not given to glorify or advocate for war in general or any particular war, but simply to recognize that that certain forms of destruction are part of the cosmic process, and that the line between "construction" and "destruction" may not always be clear. By the guideline of "constructive transformation", I mean to highlight that the transformations performed by work are not arbitrary, chaotic, or random, otherwise there would be no point in deliberately applying psychological energy to bring them about.

Spiritual Energy

We have developed a vision that sees all of the activities of the universe, including human activities, as transformations of energy brought about by other forms of energy. But we have not yet explained the connection between work and finding God. Indeed, the conception of the universe as a system of energetic transformations is completely compatible with modern science—and the depiction of the universe given above would not have been possible without the sensibility and specific findings of modern science. In particular, the description given above is consistent with the worldview of scientific materialism, which sees all phenomena in the universe as reducible to the workings of matter, with considerations of human value being subjective and relative—that is, having no essential significance, but rather things that we consider as matters of practical reality, or perhaps are compelled to consider due to the self-interested nature of our psychology, which is still conditioned by matter through the processes of biology.

Scientists view all types of energy as material energy, meaning the kind of energy that can move physical objects or heat water. And they view all other phenomena described with the word "energy" as things that can either be reduced to material energy or are otherwise illusory or unreal. For example, to the scientific materialist, the phenomenon of "psychological energy" discussed earlier would likely be seen as reducible to the physiological energy used by the body for perception, movement, and emotional experience; any further significance we attribute to the idea of consciousness that transcends physical reality would be seen as purely illusory. Spiritual seekers, however, generally recognize more forms of energy than the purely material, like life energy, psychological energy, mind energy, and the energies of personality, place, form, and spirit. The scientist would understand the power of the waterfall in terms of such factors as the velocity of the stream before the fall and the difference in potential energy before and after the fall. The spiritual seeker would in addition recognize an additional level of "vibrational" energy produced by the life-force of the waterfall. The use of the term "spiritual energy" is viewed as less than rigorous by the scientific materialist, but to the spiritual seeker, it is clear that the concept of spiritual energy is a real phenomenon that is not separate from the concept of material energy; material energy one subtype of spiritual energy, and there are more kinds of spiritual energy. In terms of the phrase used by transpersonal theorists such as Ken Wilber, we could say that the concept of spiritual energy "transcends and includes" the concept of material energy.

Let us consider how this applies to the human work involved in building a house. The scientific materialist might view the work of constructing a house as being made up of the energy of the human labor needed to gather the raw materials, the energy used to transport the materials to the job site, the energy expended by the workers laboring to build the house, plus whatever physiological energy was used by the architect, all measurable in units of physical energy. To the spiritual seeker, it is clear that the material layer of energy is real, but that there are additional significant energies involved, like the emotional energy used by the architect and builders, the mind energy used to organize the architecture and craftwork of each beam, door, and arch, the life energy of the land shaped by the previous geological and biological phenomena present at the site, and even the vibrational energy of the people who will eventually dwell in the house shaping and structuring the process as the Aristotelian "final cause".

The question of how to reconcile the stupendous variety of expressions of energy, whether physical, material, or spiritual, with the nature of God has been a persistent question throughout the history of religion and philosophy. For one prominent idea of the highest nature of God is that God a being of perfect perfection, beauty, and love who would seem to have no need or use for such an imperfect created world as we see in front of us. Still, as spiritual seekers, we are confronted with both the reality of the imperfect world and the reality of God, and the need to make sense of them somehow. For the theist or spiritual seeker, this means seeing that these forms and energies we see in the universe are not separate from the spiritual nature of God, that there presence was brought about purposefully by God, or they exist harmoniously with God, or are at least not contradictory with the existence of God. There are different ways of explaining the details—the idea of "nonduality", the idea of pantheism, the idea that God and the world are separate but that God still keeps a significant "record" of the activities and results of the world—but the specific metaphysical answer accepted by the reader does not actually affect the ability to do karmayoga; karmayoga can be practiced within a variety of metaphysical systems. The important idea that is needed for karmayoga is the idea that the energy that makes up the universe, which is the same energy expended in work, is somehow connected to God, whether that means it is separate from God but can be "given" to him, or that the energy somehow "is" God, or some other such compatible idea.

The Possibility of Spiritual Work

The essence of karmayoga, given at the beginning of the article, is offering one's work to the Divine without ego or desire. In the past two sections, we have seen that there is a nontrivial amount of philosophical and metaphysical subtlety that can go into understanding what "work" really is from a spiritual perspective. But simply doing the work, acting according to one's nature or svadharma, is still not karmayoga; a yoga is a spiritual discipline, and the act of going about one's natural activities according to one's nature with no modification is not yet yoga. The crux of the karmayoga is not just doing the work; for if we interpret the previous two sections in the most general way, we see that work is always happening—man is always expending energy according to his nature at some activity or another—for even idleness is part of man's nature and consumes energy. The crux of karmayoga is rather in offering the work to God, and not simply the act of living and expending spiritual energy by itself. To understand how this works, we will need to understand more about spiritual psychology and the nature of spiritual work.

We come to spiritual psychology by posing a question that is still left over from the discussion of metaphysics: why would God need this energy to be "offered" to him at all? Does he not possess all the energy in the universe, and already have everything that he would need? We stipulated earlier that the energy in any metaphysical concept of karmayoga is related to God somehow—it is either God's energy, or energy that God controls, or perhaps is God himself. Why would there be any need to offer it further to God?

To address this issue, we must go back to the entire purpose and aim of karmayoga. Karmayoga is a form of yoga—it is a spiritual discipline meant to lead to union with God. The discipline must be done because before doing the discipline, we are somehow not in union with God. That is, we are separated from God. Any theory of spiritual seeking must reconcile two contradictory facts: on the one hand, we have a loving relationship with God even without doing any sort of spiritual work; and yet on the other hand, we are still not ourselves in complete union with God. Rather than try to resolve this metaphysical puzzle, I will simply appeal to the empirical reality that in our normal human state we are not in God-consciousness, we are not completely filled with his knowledge and love and in union with him. A spiritual seeker is someone who realizes this fact and understands that some sort of action, practice, or discipline is needed to address it. (I would recommend that readers who wish to resolve metaphysical paradox seek out a work on metaphysics from their spiritual tradition.)

The separation from God manifests itself in each part of our psychology. The mind breaks the undifferentiated consciousness of God into the finite consciousness of our human experience made up of our own personal thoughts, emotions, and physical sensations. The heart is dominated by suffering and self-regard rather than the love for all God and all created existences. And our work, too, is affected. Normally when undertaking actions, we are concerned mostly with our own benefit. Sometimes we may also have the benefit of our family in mind; rarer elevations lead us to acts of patriotic service, the pursuit of beauty, or even the service of humanity. But work undertaken for any of these purposes or entities is still not work yet undertaken for the sake of God or offered to him directly. Actions such as these, which are intended to benefit our own human ego—or some larger form of collective ego which we are a part of—maintain the reality of separation between our own consciousness and that of God. The work done with a consciousness that upholds the state of separation serves to maintain the state of separation; karmayoga, work that is offered to God, is work that is gradually able to bring our consciousness in greater contact with God.

The fact that the essence of karmayoga lies in the offering of the work rather than the content of the work itself has implications for the nature of spiritual work. Take the examples just discussed: is it bad, then, to do patriotic or humanitarian service—or simply to undertake remunerative work for the benefits of one's family? These things no doubt are good by the standards of the world, and should by no means be abolished. (As the Gita says, the spiritual seeker's knowledge of the relative value of these forms of work should certainly not lead them to discourage people who are living regular lives that are not consecrated to God from discharging the work of their usual nature.) But unless the action is offered to God as spiritual service, it is still not karmayoga. This leads to a sort of paradox: any act that is offered to God is karmayoga, regardless of the size of its worldly effects. Doing the dishes or preparing taxes for a client, if it is done with the attitude of offering the energy of the work to God, is karmayoga; a patriotic speech, humanitarian rescue, or virtuosic artwork, if the energy is not offered to God, is not karmayoga.

This can be confusing because it conflicts with our usual human conception of selfishness versus selflessness. Human society evolved to encourage an attitude of altruism, acting for the benefit of other humans, without concern for one's own needs, because it provides benefits for society. So actions are evaluated by society as "good" if they benefit other people and "bad" if they do not. But that is not the standard by which God evaluates actions: on one hand, God transcends every person, group of people, and humanity altogether, so service to him may benefit no human beings at all; on the other hand, a portion of God is present in each person, group of people, living thing, or inanimate object, so service to any one could also be service to God—even if that service is inefficient by a utilitarian standard. This means that acts that are inspired as part of one's karmayoga may not necessarily be actions that society traditionally praises as "selfless", because a broader range of actions could be considered desirable from the perspective of God. Of course, traditionally "selfless" acts are perfectly worthy of being consecrated as karmayoga as well. And the opposite quality of "selfishness", where someone acts with regard for nothing but themselves is not compatible with karmayoga either, as the aspiring practitioner of karmayoga has to be mindful of what is asked by God.

Similarly, the spiritual value of karmayoga is not related to the economic productivity of the work at hand. Karmayoga may be very lucrative, and there is no inherent contradiction between doing karmayoga and receiving money for work. But karmayoga may also consist of work that does not generate income at all. Some of the most worthy tasks do not generate income in our current societal arrangement, such as parenting, creating fine art, or political organizing, but these are still essential to human life and culture.

Offering Work to God

One point still remains obscure: what exactly does it mean to "offer" something as abstract as work, or the energy of work, to God? Such an offering seems hard to wrap the mind around, as it would seem be an abstract offering to an abstract being. The concept of offering becomes easier to understand if we approach it in stages. First, let us consider the simple human act of giving. When we give, we start out in possession of something, and there is a specific human whom we love or care for who has need or a use for what we have to give. We give the other person the gift as an expression of love or caring, and they receive it with gratitude. We see this when a mother gives food to a child, when a child gives a toy to a friend, or when an adult gives a gift to a romantic partner.

There are several religious or spiritual ritual practices that elevate this human act of giving to a spiritual level of giving to a deity or being that is not physically present. First, the ritual practice of leaving food as an offering to the deity, and second, the practice of donating to a church or place of worship that serves as the symbol of the community of God. These now seem to be familiar, almost mundane actions, which can obscure the fact that they grow out of a much more concrete, embodied practice. In the offering of fruit to the deity, we leave a physical object for a non-physical being, though the being is represented in the physical construction of the idol. Here, the deity is not physically present in a concrete way, but they are represented by the idol, and the gift is at least tangible and recognized as having value in the human world.

To more closely approach the the "abstract" nature of the offering of work, let us consider the case of the electronic money transaction, which is more and more common in the modern world. While cash transactions still take place, the intangibility of the electronic transaction, when contrasted to the tangible case of cash or fruit, actually serves to clarify the "energetic character" of money. When exchanging money electronically, a low-dollar-value transaction like buying a sandwich may not provoke much of a reaction, but considering a larger purchase like an appliance can feel weighty and dramatic; one can almost "feel" the larger quantity of money involved. From this example we can see that, in a sense, spending money means "spending" some of your own force or energy. The analogy remains valid whether we whether we view money as an ontologically "real" force, or if we simply see the phenomenon in the psychological terms of projecting psychological energy onto the conventional symbol of money.

In this framing, the donation of money to a temple can be seen as a donation of our own personal energy or force to the community of God. And this is exactly how we must consider the energy we spend in work to do karmayoga: karmayoga is the act of offering of our will, our psychological energy, our force to God. Just as in the electronic donation of money to a temple, we cannot directly see object or the recipient but still feel our energy leaving and reaching the intended recipient, so is it that when when we lift a box, write a song, or give a speech as an offering of karmayoga, we trust that the energy of the effort is received, even though we cannot directly see the energy itself or the recipient. When a work is done as karmayoga, one applies oneself to the task with the same energy and concentration as before—the difference is that there is the consciousness that the energy of the effort is offered or donated to God. And this offering must be done without the feeling of bargaining or expectation; the offering must be with one's whole mind and heart, and devoid of claim for any benefit.

Still, even if the above analogy is helpful, the idea of "offering work to God" may still appear as a somewhat abstract concept that is less tangible than the human act of giving. When we work, we are not face-to-face with God doing the task directly for him, so the notion of "doing work for God" cannot be a literal interpretation. We are embedded in a physical world of objects like desks, computers, buildings, chairs, cars, streetlights, and so on—God himself is nowhere to be found. We use tools for our work, and the direct recipients of the work appear to be the clients, managers, and third parties of all kinds that the work is done for; the "offering" of the work to God is not as obvious as the act of sending a postal package to a client.

There are two implications for karmayoga. First, karmayoga requires practice. It is a challenging spiritual discipline that is capable of leading to the highest levels of spiritual realization, and we cannot demand that the deepest secret of the understanding of service to God is apparent immediately. And on the way to realizing that secret, we come face to face with the recalcitrance of the physical world that is being worked on and the limitations of one's human nature. Maintaining concentration on a task, performing it to the highest attainable standard of of perfection, and are dealing with the stresses of performance, which are difficult enough in the normal practice of work, need to be reconciled with an additional level of spiritual concentration. However, like other spiritual disciplines, it gets easier with practice and bears the fruit of spiritual result, and the very meaning of karmayoga itself, which may have once seemed obscure, becomes clearer.

The second lesson we see, though, is that the very difficulty of reconciling the mundaneness and physicality of the world of work with an unseen God is exactly what makes karmayoga such a powerful practice—especially for a world-affirming spiritual practice. After all, if the world is to be reconciled with God, it must include the efforts and strains of the world that an exclusively visionary or exclusively peaceful idea of spirituality is not truly able to accommodate.

In summary, karmayoga proceeds by taking up the work that we do in the mundane world and offering the effort that goes into that work to God. And we have seen that the important thing about work done for karmayoga is not the specific task that is done but the fact that the effort is offered to God. But that still leaves a major question which vexes modern man: the question of what specifically is to be done. The pure theory of karmayoga has nothing in particular to say about this subject: the work done simply has to be according to one's svadharma, or one's own nature; the question of what that nature is that should be lies in other forms of inquiry, like perhaps psychology or social theory. In this article, we have already admitted the philosophical difficulties of fixing the nature or limits of human work, simply pointing to the broad stream of human activity and saying "that is the work of man", and noting that that is the effort which karmayoga would take up. Still, we must ask: can anything else be said about this "svadharma" and its role in karmayoga?

Svadharma

One of the deepest questions facing man has to do with understanding his own nature and the way he should act. After millennia of inquiry from every major religious and philosophical tradition, and now from empirical psychology and social science, there are no firm answers. What we can say as a generalization is that the discussion about man's nature runs between two poles: one pole says that man is free to choose his actions and the other pole that says that man is constrained by various factors, and his freedom is compromised by these constraints. Every reasonable answer gives some sort of balance between these two poles, however: even the pole of freedom, for example, recognizes that the laws of physics constrain human action; and on the other hand even the the extreme pole of constraint, which might argue that we do not even have free will, recognizes that it at least feels like we have free will some of the time, and that this feeling of free will has moral relevance.

For the individual who wants to find their own nature or svadharma, each pole has its drawbacks. If we believe that we are constrained by unchangeable factors like our biology, socioeconomic status, or position dictated by an inflexible religious-philosophical system, we may not be open to the new potentialities and energies that God wishes to guide us towards. On the other hand, if we are too insistent on the possibility of our own freedom and neglect to take note of the patterns in our psychology, and the patterns in the specific ways that we relate to society and society relates to us, and other facts of circumstance, we may be unable to recognize the real limitations of the world, and might blame ourselves for not being able to exceed them with our sheer force of will.

We come back once again to the view that the pure theory of karmayoga itself does not point to an answer to the question of what should be done. Guidance can be sought in the field of career counseling or personal development; it can be pursued by trying new things; we can gain clarity by talking with people, whether domain experts or friends and family; or we can even interrogate the fundamental limits of reality or human nature through philosophy. The only general guideline I can give, that I have found valid in my own experience, is that the process of living, experiencing, and questioning refines our judgment about what is the best course of action, and we should act from our best synthesis of our experience, knowledge, heart, and divine guidance. But this advice cannot be of any specific help to anyone in any specific situation.

In short, the entire set of analytical methods and behaviors pertaining to the question "what should I do?" should remain valid for the reader even after reading this article. From the point of view of karmayoga, what is truly important is that whatever occupations or activities we do adopt, we offer the energy to God. This is not to downplay the difficulty and importance of finding the right activities and right balance of life in the complexity of today's world. But one thing the seeker finds that as they progress along the path of karmayoga is that the question of what one's svadharma is resolves itself, slowly or quickly. When the energy of work is offered to God, it has a purifying effect as it moves through your system, so you become more and more able to discern God's guidance, which helps to answer the questions of what you should do and be.

Results of Karmayoga

Ultimately, the true reason to take up a demanding practice like karmayoga is for its effects. (That is, at least until the final stage of karmayoga when one feels that one is doing the work only for God, without even any need of individual spiritual benefit.) What then are the specific effects of karmayoga? First, karmayoga leads to greater perfection in work: when doing work offered to God, the capacity of executing work with perfection inevitably increases. This is because when one offers work to God, one will feel compelled not to offer mediocre effort but rather one's best effort; this is similar to how an inspiring teacher or manager will draw the best efforts out of the students or employees, even though it makes greater demands on them. This quality effort will result in a greater and greater perfection in the results. Of course, this does not happen in a vacuum: mechanisms like external feedback, theoretical insight into problems and defects, and skill and knowledge of the craft of the task all remain relevant. But if the aim of the work and its offering to God are kept sincerely in view, inadequate results will feel like an inadequate offering, and the practitioner will be guided towards the right resources for improvement.

A second beneficial effect of karmayoga is developing the virtues of work. To execute work well, the practitioner will need to develop perseverance, skill, judgment, the ability to work well with people, and so on; in fact, it offers a nearly endless field of practice and realization. Of course, these benefits may come from doing any sort of work regardless of whether it is specially offered as karmayoga. One difference is that karmayoga can mitigate against the negative effects that can attend progress in work done simply with a secular motive, such as arrogance and superiority. That said, there are obviously many secular workers who are able to avoid these pitfalls as well. From a spiritual perspective, though, these virtues are beneficial because they allow us to be more perfect instruments of God.

A third benefit of karmayoga is that it is able to bring spiritual results that are conventionally thought to be the result of other spiritual paths into the outer part of the being. For example, karmayoga can assist in growing one's inner peace and solidity in all outer situations, as one confronts greater real world challenges and stresses that come with work and meets them with a spiritual attitude. Karmayoga can even result in developing the quality of love: all work is a form of service, whether one is serving human clients, or abstract ideals; through karmayoga, one grows into a deeper and deeper caring for the end that is served, which goes with a deeper and deeper love for God in the form of the client or end, which fuses with the love for God himself. And karmayoga can make these virtues stable in a more robust way than other spiritual disciplines because it must bring these virtues into the difficult situations that come up in the "real world".

But the most characteristic perfection of karmayoga is becoming an agent of the Divine Will. As we give up our energy to God without seeking for our own personal gain, our being is purified. We become more and more open to the inspirations that God gives us, more capable of discerning and refusing the demands of our ego, and the capacity of the outer nature to execute the inspiration increases as well. In earlier sections, we discussed the vision of the manifested universe as a system of energetic exchange. The Divine Will works through all these energies to bring about his Will by influencing the entities incarnated in the universe in a variety of ways. But the beings who are most able to bring about the Divine Will are those who have perfected their outer instruments and surrendered them to God. Karmayoga is the most direct way of training oneself to participate fully in this Divine Plan.

#God spirituality yoga karmayoga philosophy energy

0 notes