Hi rishi:

Some years ago I wrote a poem about getting IT. In it I tried to say in a few lines what you said in your blog. I quoted it here on the cafe before, but you are relatively new, and may not have read it.

Getting IT

IT is we; we are IT.

We can't comprehend IT without experiencing IT,

But we can experience IT without comprehending IT—

For we are IT!

IT reveals everything;

IT explains nothing.

The interpretations

Of ITs revelations

Are our creations.

We need to recover or re-discover the experiential spirituality that was the crucial aspect of the early movement around Jesus and John the Baptist. Their religion was not a doctrinal religion but a mystical movement, wherein the direct experience of the Divine, and acting directly and dynamically from the Unitive Love experienced in that experience, was the essential element of faith. The Last Supper and the Ritual of Communion serve as a constant reminder of that Divine Union and Communion.

Hi Arminius,

Thanks for your poem, which I enjoyed.  If I am understanding you correctly, I think where I differ from the stance you are taking is that, for me, if they are rightly taken up, both doctrine and experience are valid ways in to a transforming awareness of the Divine Mystery. In my view, both are also essential aspects of all religions (including Zen Buddhism).  Whichever way(s) in to that Mystery that we take, however, the only test that we are really 'getting it,' is the emergence of the fruit of a genuinely loving character (which includes justice and all of the other companion virtues).

All the Best,

Rishi

Hi rishi:

Yes, of course, it is impossible to operate totally without doctrines. Even arguing against doctrine is a form of doctrine, and traditional Zen is, as you said, not entirely without instructions, teachings, and doctrines. They are minmized, though; the novice is encouraged to seek mainly by meditating and turning inward.

If the aim of doctrine is THE Divine Union and Communion, then I fully agree with almost any doctrine. (And the doctrines of the Trinity, Communion, and Baptism are such Unitive doctrines and sacraments) The end justifies the means. Most people require some form of doctrine. A fully enlightened being may be beyond doctrines, but fully realizes the need for doctrines.

I think it is unfortunate that so much of Christianity is (was) doctrinal only, devoid of experiential spirituality, with the experience of the Divine (a.k.a. Grace) attributed to the whim of a capricious, supernatural  God rather than being regarded as an innate but largely unaware state, of which everyone can become aware—if we so choose!

There is, however, a price to pay for the Divine Union: The price is the egocentric self! In order for us to get IT; IT has to get us! We have to give ourselves to IT in this Divine bargain. The egocentric self is the price for the Divine prize!

Yes!  So expensive!   I sometimes wonder if the lack of having to pay this outrageous price is a big part of what makes conventional religion so boring for me. The great price, and how I am 'wooed' by Love into seeing the wisdom of paying it, is so beautiful for me. You're leading me into the mystical power of the cross, but don't get me started...  Thanks for the inspiration.

Rishi

Thought I would throw this into the mix - "Costly discipleship sourced by grace." Think it is Bonhoffer.

Charles, way back in the day (late 70s) I remember buying a copy of Bonhoffer's "Cost of DIscipleship."  Somewhere along the line it got passed on or lost before I ever read it.   He's someone whose name I hear occasionally by radicals of one kind or another. I'll have to find another copy.

Who was it that talked about "cheap grace" ?  I think it may have been him as well.

yup - he called for a teaching and living out of costly discleship.  Sort of taking into account all the many things Jesus told people to leave or do without, etc .. . not an easy Christianity that allows you to just go to church, read and pray, but has tangible cost to it.  A lot more there though obviously.  Unfortunately I haven't read to much of him directly either, it has been quotes and commentaries.  Although really I don't think he actually wrote too much in the way of books.  A lot of his stuff came from letters he wrote while in a Nazi concentration camp.