Transcendence

I marvel at the power of 0 to symbolise the ego dissolution of the mystic, the pure contentless consciousness of the perennial philosophy that challenges the scientistic paradigm in consciousness studies. I recognise the value of perennialism, but its tendency to dogma and to place mystical monism as superior to other forms of spiritual expression makes it feel constraining1. Maybe because of the rigidity of my catholic education and a tendency to be too literal, I resist the implication that only those who become “worthy” through the training of the mind, renunciation and service could achieve their spiritual aspirations. As part of my course, I was asked to explore this resistance by practising with a spiritual community favouring mystical monism. I engaged with devotees of the Krishna consciousness movement (ISKCON), listening with a beginner’s mind to their teachings based on Vedanta philosophies. Their belief system comes from the Vedas and the Bhagavad Gita, and they are devoted to a primordial consciousness represented by Krishna, an avatar of the supreme Godhead Vishnu, who creates Maya, the illusion of matter and the false reality of the physical world. I noticed their priests struggle for the unrealistic goal of absolute selflessness whilst displaying an attitude towards novices and non-devotees that felt as patronising as my religious upbringing and as limiting to the creative ability of the subjective self to participate in its own spiritual growth. Despite my disengagement with ISKCON’s interpretation, I felt inspired by the Bhagavad Gita and how Krishna taught Arjuna about transcendence, so I decided to explore a different interpretation. Instead of a theistic monism, Samkhya philosophy presented it as a metaphysical dualism between two ontological realities: Purusha, the Knower and Prakriti, the Field. Purusha, also known as Atman, is the divine unmanifested Self, the paradoxical 0 that holds infinite possibility. Prakriti is the emergent reality that creates both mind and matter by the continuous interaction of three essential energies known as the Guna's; Maya is the illusion of separation and attachment to the mind, which is always evolving2. Samkhya aligned with my conceptual framework and with a participatory approach to spiritual engagement. From this perspective, I could observe and understand transcendence as an innate quality, a spiritual state available to all that could be regained through different paths. Beyond any textual interpretation was the experience, the sense of interconnection that came from the practice of Kirtan. The joyous chanting of Hare Krishna Hare Rama and Prasadam, the ritual of sharing consecrated food, provided a sense of spiritual communion that was emotional and based on the hedonic instinct to belong. I let go of literal understanding and embraced inexplicable, powerful phenomena, feeling safe in a community of practice that supported my spiritual growth3. From that sense of belonging, my resistance to transcendence softened, encouraged by Karma Yoga, Arjuna’s path of selfless action. I have much work to do on the selfless, and I do not know where the path is or what action looks like, but I am looking with more awareness at the Goddess that lies in Chaos and the blank slate of possibility that is the rest of my life4.

References

1. Ferrer, J. N. (2000). The perennial philosophy revisited. Journal of Transpersonal Psychology, 32(1), 7–30

2. Easwaran, E. (Trans.). (2007). The Bhagavad Gita. Nilgiri Press.

3. Schlitz, M, Vieten, C. & Amorok, T. (2007).   Living Deeply - The Art & Science of Transformation in Everyday Life.  New Harbinger Publications and Noetic Books.

4. Ferrer, J.N. (2009). The Plurality of Religions and the Spirit of Pluralism: A Participatory Vision of the Future of Religion. International Journal of Transpersonal Studies, 28 (1) 139–151. https//dx.doi.org/10.24972/ijts.2008.27.1.1