Monday 8 October 2012

It's not easy being a non materialist....


In my last blog I explained how I came to be presently devoting so much time to mysticism. But it’s not easy being a non-materialist in a materialist world. I’m not derided for my beliefs, just mainly ignored by most people when I’m talking about those beliefs,-  even polite people who like me. (I’m relieved to say I think some people do, i.e. like me, even some close relations.)

I think this is because, to use my brother’s word, most people (in which he includes himself) are just plain baffled. Often the only language available for me to talk about my main interests in life is unintelligible. One of the reasons I am writing this blog is to experiment with mystical language; to find ways of expressing spiritual concepts that most people would understand, and perhaps find useful, without actually degrading those concepts. When teaching I had a lot of practice trying to explain some quite high flown academic and intellectual theories and models in a way that allowed students who were unfamiliar with such concepts to apply them immediately to their everyday work.  I don’t know if I succeeded, but I still seem to have the urge to try, albeit in a different realm of study.

Mystical language is obtuse, apparently, for a reason. Although it takes a lot of work, it is possible for a human to access other worlds with the result that such people acquire ‘unnatural’ powers in the physical world. The use of these could cause havoc (indeed, have caused havoc.) So the teaching was mainly oral down the centuries, and only to people who had proved themselves stable and of good intent. When something was written down, it was put into language which is not easily decipherable.

In addition of course, a lot of what I'm repeating in this blog would be considered heretical by many people, and in past centuries, and still in some countries, there could be dire consequences for the authors if their writings were understood by the community at large.

But I think the main reason the language is obscure is that in modern society we just don’t have much idea of the concepts to which the language refers, or have a rather corrupted and vague view of them. For example, how often do you think of angels (the non-human ones) and in what context? What is your Soul, and how does if differ from the metaphorical way in which we use the word ‘heart’ (e.g. “her heart wasn’t in it any more”)? What is the relationship between your ego/superego, your Higher Self and your Soul, and how do you benefit from knowing? When I assure you that both you and me are ‘God’ do you want to run screaming from the room, or are you reassured? If I mention that your Soul doesn't take much interest in you until you show some interest in it, do you have any idea what I'm talking about?

Modernism, which we tend to date back to the Enlightenment at the end of the 18th century, is wonderful. Its rationality has freed us from life-draining superstition and all sorts of unfair and unjust practices previously maintained as ‘tradition’. But in throwing out the bath water of superstition and religion, (many religions having drawn far away from the impulses which created them), we threw out the baby of access to our interior selves. The precise meaning of words like ‘heaven’ ‘paradise’  ‘soul’ ‘divine’ ‘prayer’ ’spirit’ are as baffling to most people nowadays as are the words used in quantum mechanics to most non-scientists. I suppose the majority of people think that understanding the concepts involved in either area is irrelevant to their everyday lives. Tomorrow or Thursday I intend to blog about that in more detail. In the meantime, I’d be very interested in others’ views.

6 comments:

  1. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Dear Helen,
    This is wonderful! and I know EXACTLY where you are coming from! I have been a member of the LIC for some considerable time now but tend to stay in the background and watch the fun... I, like you, use the Kaballah to put forward my understanding of how it all works. I have realised that it is the unifying and unconditional force of the evolutionary impusle (propulse) that turns the schizophrenic crown of thorns into the multiple intelligences of the crown of crowns. For the last twenty years I have been showing individuals, through what I call Integrative Health Practice (Integrative because you have to do something and it moves), how to tune it to their own authenticity and real purpose in life. It is THE most important thing in my life too. May the force remain with you :) Thanks very much!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Many thanks for your kind comments. I've googled "Integrative Health Practice", but don't know if any of the sites that were listed are directly connected to you. I'd really like to know more about what you do, as I've trained as a Psychosynthesis Counsellor myself, and did the first year of a seven year course in acupuncture before life took me off in another direction (so I knew all the meridians, but hadn't been let anywhere near a needle yet!) Do you write your own blog that I can look at? Or would you like to write something about your interests that I could turn into a posting on this blog (attributed to you of course)? I think I also ought to put more on about the LIC and Integral

      Delete
    2. Dear Helen,
      I have a blog site - http://let-them-all-in.blogspot.co.uk/ that I occasionally post a few jokes on :) and also have some stuff on youtube from a while back: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y6Qj3qdjbjY Practising this stuff has transformed my life totally and I have never been more calm and clear minded in my whole life. The Joy of Living is my theme and I am a dreadful 'mickey taker' which gets on some peoples nerves but you can't win em all... I am at present developing a module on Evolutionary Psychology for The University of Liverpool and am developing a link between Multiple Intelligence theory, the Modular Mind and the Sephira... That should keep them busy! God knows where it is all leading if you get me drift. Best wishes Joe

      Delete
  3. Nigel Wallace comments: "I think your brother's term 'baffled' is a very good one, one to which I can definitely relate!
    The whole business of communicating metaphysical matters is very problematic and I have grown more to the practice of responding to intelligent and heartfelt enquiries rather than any attempt at initiating 'cold' discussions.

    One of the great difficulties is most people's unwillingness and indeed incapacity to think or imagine outside the self-centred box. I see life as primarily an evolutionary event and to indiscriminately reduce everything to the personal, or see everything through the personal lens brings great pain and confusion. This narcissistic perspective pervades our culture and many personal and social and global problems can be laid at its door.

    "If it's not about me or mine - then I dont want to know!". I have found my experience with Spiral Dynamics immensely helpful in beginning to understand something of how the world works and with small adjustments to the sometime rather jargonistic language- more general conversation about social and personal evolution is possible.

    Another great shift came about for me after reading Jim Marion, inter alia "Death of the Mythic God". As the title implies it is about separating out the spiritual from the mythological. Again Helen -the baby and the bathwater metaphor applies well. We forget that the myths and stories and images of religion are embedded in the culture from which they came. Thus when the culture changes so do the stories change their meaning. They need to be re-interpreted and checked for relevance and application. Just so much to discuss- thanks for this opportunity Helen.
    cheers Nigel

    ReplyDelete
  4. Hi Nigel,
    I first came across 'Spiral Dynamics' in Ken Wilber's book "A Theory of Everything". I was gobsmacked by it - it explained and clarified so much about what was going on in the world: e.g. post-modernists dissing modernism, and traditionalists upset by modernism and post-modernism. And all around me, in the City, I could see egocentric pre-conventional 'red' corporations stalking about, red in tooth and claw, even though they could talk post-modernism perfectly! It was also Ken Wilber who explained for me so well the difference between pre-rational and trans-rational, and how Freud and Jung have both confused the two. However, I found it very difficult to apply spiral dynamics to management practice in a useful way - it was what my thesis was supposed to be about. Of course Torbert and Cook-Greuter have already a lot of work on this, but I note and empathise with what you comment on my next post about this.
    Cheers,
    Helen

    ReplyDelete