Philosophy Discussion Forums | A Humans-Only Club for Open-Minded Discussion & Debate

[Stoppelmann]

Those who do not know it cannot understand what contemplation can give you. It has often been said and just as often ridiculed, and the scriptures carry the voices of frustration, some sad, some angry at the fact that the majority of people seem to have no time for it. Contemplation is a method, nothing more, to release the inner intuition that connects us to the great spirit in which we live, weave and are. My inner nature, which religious traditions call breath, soul, the self, or being, connects with the cosmic force, the divine, the sacred.

This contemplative connection admonishes us as much as it gives us hope, recognises us in our weakness, in our woundedness, in our blindness and confusion. It lifts us up and shows us the world as it could be, not tame but dynamic and full of emerging life, but also shows us that we have a mandate to understand and complement it, to wrestle with it and guide it so that there may be life on it in its diversity for as long as possible. But we also see our relationships, the confusion of languages, our power games, and the disruption of the development of humankind, the endless wars and conflicts, and the destruction we wreak. Human history is full of contradictions, because we fail to understand ourselves, and our potential.

The biggest leap in human development was, it wasn’t so much technology, but the development of trade between tribes, then between people from different countries, and later from different continents. The incredible change of attitude, learning to consider what others think, what they need, how to provide them with goods that they could exchange for what they needed, was a massive progression, because those people realised that warring and pillaging didn’t provide a continuous flow of goods. In fact, it could cause the supply to dry up altogether. At the same time, ideas were exchanged, even beliefs and religions spread, comparisons were made, artistry was learnt, languages were mastered. We seem to have made this discovery around 3,000 BC in ancient Mesopotamia and the Indus Valley, when different materials such as spices, metals, and cloth, were traded, but I suspect it went on earlier. Considering we have sites going back to 9,600 BC, I’m convinced that these people were gathering from areas wide apart and bringing goods with them.

Therefore, the decision to go to war against a people instead of trading and exchanging with them is regressive and primitive. So, the colonialists, for all their supposed piety, were regressive meddlers who turned history on its head, just like anyone who pursues arrogant goals. There were many, of course, and I cannot help feeling that whoever they were, whether in China, Mongolia, Russia, India, the Middle East, Europe, Africa or the Americas, when expansionist ideologies take it upon themselves to dominate and dictate, they turn evolution on its head, regardless of what it looks like. Today's tendency to dominate world markets, so that traditional agriculture reaches a dead end and countries become dependent on others to feed their populations, is an eradication of diversity and a plundering of countries.

Sages, prophets, and mystics have said this for millennia, and were punished for it. Instead, lacking introspection and wisdom, religion was used to manipulate and influence, bread and games were given to the masses to occupy them, and those that considered themselves powerful ruled – until the next megalomaniac took over with delusional fantasies of wealth, power, or omnipotence. The wise are pushed aside, humility ridiculed, and the healers are overwhelmed by the sick, victims of the present irreverence, driven by those who disregard all life but their own. And all the time, we fool ourselves in thinking we are progressive.

Do you have a contemplative practise that gives you a clear view of the world?

[Pattern-chaser]

Do you have a contemplative practise that gives you a clear view of the world?

For me, it's a bit of a spectrum. At one end, I 'daydream'; at the other, I indulge in philosophy. All of this spectrum is contemplative, and I find it beneficial and enjoyable, even therapeutic or healing, on occasion. It's not trivial, though. One can come upon the most profound truths in the same way as one might discover something much more, er, light-weight. Musing. Meditating? Praying, even? Contemplation.

To me, it has enormous value.

[Stoppelmann]

Do you have a contemplative practise that gives you a clear view of the world?

For me, it's a bit of a spectrum. At one end, I 'daydream'; at the other, I indulge in philosophy. All of this spectrum is contemplative, and I find it beneficial and enjoyable, even therapeutic or healing, on occasion. It's not trivial, though. One can come upon the most profound truths in the same way as one might discover something much more, er, light-weight. Musing. Meditating? Praying, even? Contemplation.

To me, it has enormous value.

I started meditating in 2002 after a very stressful time in nursing and attended a MBSR course held by a vascular surgeon that went over 7 weeks. This gave me a regular practise that even my son adopted, and we both investigated other methods besides the many forms of meditation, including contemplation. Because I already had a history in the church, it was an easy step to realise that, especially in the Catholic church, there were many groups the focused on contemplative and meditative practises, but they were on the fringe of the church. Prayer became less speaking and more listening, meditation and contemplation mixed, and “metta meditation” took the place of intercession. I quite naturally read a lot from Jack Kornfield and other authors on Buddhism, as well as meditative people from monastic orders in Christianity. This, of course, meant that I had a different outlook on Christianity, which led to my leaving the church parish, though I was still active professionally in diaconal institutions as a nurse.

I belong to the group of people who value these practises above theology, which to a large degree is a lot of speculation built up like building bricks. I also translate Christianity non-dually, borrowing at times from Advaida Vedanta, Rupert Spira etc. For me, it comes from the same seed, just culturally diverse, and has a lot to do with psychology and healing practises, and helpful in the meaning crisis, a subject that John Vervaeke has spent a lot of time working on, and he meditates too, so there we have the connection.

[JackDaydream]

Do you have a contemplative practise that gives you a clear view of the world?

For me, it's a bit of a spectrum. At one end, I 'daydream'; at the other, I indulge in philosophy. All of this spectrum is contemplative, and I find it beneficial and enjoyable, even therapeutic or healing, on occasion. It's not trivial, though. One can come upon the most profound truths in the same way as one might discover something much more, er, light-weight. Musing. Meditating? Praying, even? Contemplation.

To me, it has enormous value.

I started meditating in 2002 after a very stressful time in nursing and attended a MBSR course held by a vascular surgeon that went over 7 weeks. This gave me a regular practise that even my son adopted, and we both investigated other methods besides the many forms of meditation, including contemplation. Because I already had a history in the church, it was an easy step to realise that, especially in the Catholic church, there were many groups the focused on contemplative and meditative practises, but they were on the fringe of the church. Prayer became less speaking and more listening, meditation and contemplation mixed, and “metta meditation” took the place of intercession. I quite naturally read a lot from Jack Kornfield and other authors on Buddhism, as well as meditative people from monastic orders in Christianity. This, of course, meant that I had a different outlook on Christianity, which led to my leaving the church parish, though I was still active professionally in diaconal institutions as a nurse.

I belong to the group of people who value these practises above theology, which to a large degree is a lot of speculation built up like building bricks. I also translate Christianity non-dually, borrowing at times from Advaida Vedanta, Rupert Spira etc. For me, it comes from the same seed, just culturally diverse, and has a lot to do with psychology and healing practises, and helpful in the meaning crisis, a subject that John Vervaeke has spent a lot of time working on, and he meditates too, so there we have the connection.

The comparison between prayer and meditation is one which I find interesting. As a Catholic I always preferred silent meditation as opposed to reciting prayers and used to find having to participate in the rituals of being in church to be an unhelpful distraction. Now, I prefer to go to meditation if I can, but I probably don't meditate as much as I wish. There is also contemplation as a being an approach to life in general. I find sitting looking out of busses to be a helpful way of contemplation or sitting by a river. There may not always be a clear difference between daydreaming. I find that I can sit for hours just thinking and the only problem can be that chores and tasks don't get done. Nevertheless, the focus on tasks may be symptomatic of what Eric Fromm describes as a bias in Western society towards doing rather being. I definitely see myself as more being orientated.

[Stoppelmann]

The comparison between prayer and meditation is one which I find interesting. As a Catholic I always preferred silent meditation as opposed to reciting prayers and used to find having to participate in the rituals of being in church to be an unhelpful distraction. Now, I prefer to go to meditation if I can, but I probably don't meditate as much as I wish. There is also contemplation as a being an approach to life in general. I find sitting looking out of busses to be a helpful way of contemplation or sitting by a river. There may not always be a clear difference between daydreaming. I find that I can sit for hours just thinking and the only problem can be that chores and tasks don't get done. Nevertheless, the focus on tasks may be symptomatic of what Eric Fromm describes as a bias in Western society towards doing rather being. I definitely see myself as more being orientated.

I like the mention of Erich Fromm, who was one of the first Philosophers I came to know, and his To Have or To Be was the first German book I read (and translated) in my endeavour to better my command of the German language. Through him I started looking at Christianity and Buddhism more closely, as well as the many philosophical references he gave, including, of course his understanding of Marxism.

It was this beginning that coloured my reading of Christianity, and even though I was for a while associated to an evangelical church, I grew out of it and turned to a number of Catholic teachers and writers, but took the lead from Thomas Merton to investigate many monastic traditions. There I came across meditation and contemplation, which differs in detail but has very many similarities between the traditions.

I was a daydreamer as a child and had a vivid imagination, which I still do to some degree, which is why contemplation has been helpful to focus and quieten my mind, but after the MBSR course and the many meditative practises we learned, I valued the river as well. Especially after reading Siddhartha by Herman Hesse, where the river plays a big role.

I recently returned to Erich Fromm and his book the Art of Loving, which is a small and, I find, meditative look at love as an expression of Being rather than just an emotion. But the world is rich on traditions that have long ago warned us that we have to learn to be above all else, and not fall into automated doing, like a cog in a machine, or clinging to what we can have, which are secondary. The most authentic people are those who are present in the moment, and beam out a Dasein that suggests a composure, calmness and serenity.

[Leontiskos]

Because I already had a history in the church, it was an easy step to realise that, especially in the Catholic church, there were many groups the focused on contemplative and meditative practises, but they were on the fringe of the church.

I am familiar with Buddhism and many of the sources you mention, but I am Catholic and I left most of Buddhism behind. The reason contemplation is sometimes now viewed as being on the fringe of the Church is because of the syncretistic tendencies of a few people like Thomas Keating. In reality there is a strong contemplative tradition in the Catholic West, particularly among the Carmelites, the Rhineland mystics, the Camaldolese, Carthusians, Franciscans, Cassian, and then further back as the monastic and eremitical hesychasm of Eastern Christianity influenced the West. There is also some that comes through the Trappists, Cistercians, and Benedictines, but it is a smaller portion. So you have a very strong and pure tradition of contemplation in Christianity, even if it is not given the same centrality as it is in Buddhism. Christianity tends to be a much more sacramental, incarnational, and communal religion than Buddhism, which is why contemplation is less prominent in Christianity.

[Stoppelmann]

 

Because I already had a history in the church, it was an easy step to realise that, especially in the Catholic church, there were many groups the focused on contemplative and meditative practises, but they were on the fringe of the church.

 

I am familiar with Buddhism and many of the sources you mention, but I am Catholic and I left most of Buddhism behind. The reason contemplation is sometimes now viewed as being on the fringe of the Church is because of the syncretistic tendencies of a few people like Thomas Keating. In reality there is a strong contemplative tradition in the Catholic West, particularly among the Carmelites, the Rhineland mystics, the Camaldolese, Carthusians, Franciscans, Cassian, and then further back as the monastic and eremitical hesychasm of Eastern Christianity influenced the West. There is also some that comes through the Trappists, Cistercians, and Benedictines, but it is a smaller portion. So you have a very strong and pure tradition of contemplation in Christianity, even if it is not given the same centrality as it is in Buddhism. Christianity tends to be a much more sacramental, incarnational, and communal religion than Buddhism, which is why contemplation is less prominent in Christianity. 

 

I agree with you that the Catholic practise tends to be more sacramental and communal, with the habitual attendance of Mass throughout the week, mostly visited by women, and in fact to a large degree organised by women, even though the ceremony was carried out by a priest. I worked for the catholic church for several years and although the local priest and I had a very heartfelt relationship, when he and all the other priests were either booked out, ill, or otherwise not available, on Christmas Eve I held a service for the residents of the local Catholic retirement home, with every seat taken and a great deal of praise afterwards, but it was boycotted by the nuns, and criticised by the diocese. There were many instances where we conflicted, and it resulted in me turning to the protestant church, which lacked the contemplative aspect completely, and consequently was at odds with me. 

I also agree with you that there is a tradition in the Catholic church, with a form of contemplative prayer being first practiced and taught by the Desert Fathers of Egypt, Palestine and Syria including Evagrius, St. Augustine and St. Gregory the Great in the West, but these were largely unknown to the congregation, and although made popular by several authors like Anselm Gruen, the only conversations I could have about them were with a former Monk who was a colleague of mine, and the priest I already mentioned. I turned towards Father Keating and the World Community for Christian Meditation and Laurence Freeman for orientation, where meditation takes a central role in the contemplative life. 

This was important to me because I struggled with the changes that were made in elderly care, with an expressed disregard for the spiritual care of residents and staff, which had always been part of my vocation, and a turn towards profit orientation. I was still working for the church, and my service was welcome, but when I stumbled health wise, I found myself alone. Even the parish that had welcomed my contribution left me to heal myself, and I lost interest. I turned to sources like The Imitation of Christ and the English mystics of the 14th century, such as The Cloud of Unknowing, but also found some German authors who pointed to a more comparative theology, and eventually I was fully syncretic in my outlook. 
 

[Leontiskos]

 

Because I already had a history in the church, it was an easy step to realise that, especially in the Catholic church, there were many groups the focused on contemplative and meditative practises, but they were on the fringe of the church.

 

I am familiar with Buddhism and many of the sources you mention, but I am Catholic and I left most of Buddhism behind. The reason contemplation is sometimes now viewed as being on the fringe of the Church is because of the syncretistic tendencies of a few people like Thomas Keating. In reality there is a strong contemplative tradition in the Catholic West, particularly among the Carmelites, the Rhineland mystics, the Camaldolese, Carthusians, Franciscans, Cassian, and then further back as the monastic and eremitical hesychasm of Eastern Christianity influenced the West. There is also some that comes through the Trappists, Cistercians, and Benedictines, but it is a smaller portion. So you have a very strong and pure tradition of contemplation in Christianity, even if it is not given the same centrality as it is in Buddhism. Christianity tends to be a much more sacramental, incarnational, and communal religion than Buddhism, which is why contemplation is less prominent in Christianity. 

 

I agree with you that the Catholic practise tends to be more sacramental and communal, with the habitual attendance of Mass throughout the week, mostly visited by women, and in fact to a large degree organised by women, even though the ceremony was carried out by a priest.

While it is true that there is a practical difference, this really flows from a deeper theological difference. Catholicism is more ontologically relational insofar as you have not only the God-world and God-human relations, but also ad intra trinitarian relations within the Godhead itself. You have material sacraments that confer grace and connect one to creation. You have eschatological communion, both in the communion of saints and in the resurrection of the body.

In Buddhism none of this is really true. No God, no trinity, no sacraments, no eternal persistence of the person (and therefore no eschatological communion of any kind) etc. I think this is why religions or quasi-religions such as Christianity, Confucianism, Taoism, and Hinduism outpace Buddhism on a societal and interpersonal level. I actually think that a big part of the West's fascination with Buddhism is its compatibility with our individualism.

I also agree with you that there is a tradition in the Catholic church, with a form of contemplative prayer being first practiced and taught by the Desert Fathers of Egypt, Palestine and Syria including Evagrius, St. Augustine and St. Gregory the Great in the West, but these were largely unknown to the congregation, and although made popular by several authors like Anselm Gruen, the only conversations I could have about them were with a former Monk who was a colleague of mine, and the priest I already mentioned. I turned towards Father Keating and the World Community for Christian Meditation and Laurence Freeman for orientation, where meditation takes a central role in the contemplative life.

Yes, it seems to me that Christianity has dropped the ball on contemplation and thus lost a very precious gift, especially in the West and in Protestantism. I don't mind Fr. Keating myself, and I have read him profitably, but I understand why some are wary. Orthodox would say that the reason the West was forced to forfeit contemplation ("hesychasm") is because we have grown to have such a dearth of (contemplative) monasteries, which may be true. In this way you can see how we have maintained the Benedictine lectio divina much better than we have maintained contemplation. There are other reasons too, such as absorbing the Protestant critique of Hellenism through ecumenism, along with the contemplation that was so closely tied to the Hellenic model.

I worked for the catholic church for several years and although the local priest and I had a very heartfelt relationship, when he and all the other priests were either booked out, ill, or otherwise not available, on Christmas Eve I held a service for the residents of the local Catholic retirement home, with every seat taken and a great deal of praise afterwards, but it was boycotted by the nuns, and criticised by the diocese. There were many instances where we conflicted, and it resulted in me turning to the protestant church, which lacked the contemplative aspect completely, and consequently was at odds with me. 

[...]

This was important to me because I struggled with the changes that were made in elderly care, with an expressed disregard for the spiritual care of residents and staff, which had always been part of my vocation, and a turn towards profit orientation. I was still working for the church, and my service was welcome, but when I stumbled health wise, I found myself alone. Even the parish that had welcomed my contribution left me to heal myself, and I lost interest. I turned to sources like The Imitation of Christ and the English mystics of the 14th century, such as The Cloud of Unknowing, but also found some German authors who pointed to a more comparative theology, and eventually I was fully syncretic in my outlook. 

Yes, I am sorry to hear that. I have seen all of this myself, particularly the problems in elderly care. I have also been left out to dry by the Church when health issues arrived. At present Christianity seems to be struggling with some significant moral issues. Of course the culture at large is also struggling in the same way, but we seem to have special evidence of the malady within the churches.

I sometimes read outside the Judeo-Christian tradition, particularly in Buddhism or Hinduism. My concern with syncretism is that it is so easy to err with syncretism in a pluralistic society. For example, at one point I found myself reading James Fredericks and Paul Knitter as I moved down that syncretic path, but eventually I realized that I was committing small errors over and over until they compounded into something quite out of line with reality. That is, once those errors began to propose the thesis that Christianity and Buddhism are similar religions, I realized that something was amiss. Even Buddhist scholars who studied in the West, such as Masao Abe, recognize the vast distance between the two religions. I actually believe he studied in your country.

In any case, I understand some of the motivations and reasoning behind a syncretic approach, and to a large extent they make sense. I suppose I am more open to the sort of syncretism that flows from the kind of interreligious dialogue which is carried out on a scholarly level. I would even consider Merton's dialogue with Buddhism to be of this calibur.

[Stoppelmann]

While it is true that there is a practical difference, this really flows from a deeper theological difference. Catholicism is more ontologically relational insofar as you have not only the God-world and God-human relations, but also ad intra trinitarian relations within the Godhead itself. You have material sacraments that confer grace and connect one to creation. You have eschatological communion, both in the communion of saints and in the resurrection of the body.

In Buddhism none of this is really true. No God, no trinity, no sacraments, no eternal persistence of the person (and therefore no eschatological communion of any kind) etc. I think this is why religions or quasi-religions such as Christianity, Confucianism, Taoism, and Hinduism outpace Buddhism on a societal and interpersonal level. I actually think that a big part of the West's fascination with Buddhism is its compatibility with our individualism.

I agree that Catholicism is vastly different in that it is theism, whereas Buddhism is not, at least not primarily, even if there is a spiritual world that some Buddhists believe in, mainly Indian figures such as devas, asuras and yakshas, but not central. There are, however, a number of figures that are invoked such as Arya Tārā as “Our Lady of the Void,” a symbol of the Divine Matrix that nurtures, hears the cries of beings experiencing misery in samsara, and brings the seed of Buddha-nature to fruition. But she is also simultaneously the womb into which everything returns and dissolves once again. However, the invocation of deities in Buddhism has a different character.

Jack Kornfield, who graduated from Dartmouth College in Asian Studies, worked on tropical medicine teams in the Mekong River valley, trained as a Buddhist monk, and holds a Ph.D. in clinical psychology, and has written several books on healing, especially A Path With A Heart, with many autobiographical details, in which love is central. His first chapter is entitled Did I love Well, and the whole book displays a concern that, for all of our expertise in medicine, introspection via meditation could help us all to discover that love is central to healing. This book was a very important influence in my vocation in elderly care and, in the end, my understanding of Christianity.

Yes, it seems to me that Christianity has dropped the ball on contemplation and thus lost a very precious gift, especially in the West and in Protestantism. I don't mind Fr. Keating myself, and I have read him profitably, but I understand why some are wary. Orthodox would say that the reason the West was forced to forfeit contemplation ("hesychasm") is because we have grown to have such a dearth of (contemplative) monasteries, which may be true. In this way you can see how we have maintained the Benedictine lectio divina much better than we have maintained contemplation. There are other reasons too, such as absorbing the Protestant critique of Hellenism through ecumenism, along with the contemplation that was so closely tied to the Hellenic model.

Strange that you would differentiate lectio divina from contemplation, it was the practise that I adopted in preparing for Bible studies, which was too “mystical” for protestant people, although they said the Bible meeting was enlightening. The combination of lectio divina in preparation and socratic “midwifery” brought a number of surprising results, but [not] surprisingly, it made many people uneasy, because they had a feeling that something “happened”. I think the reaction was in some way due to superstition, because one fine day, after one of the most mystifying sessions, I was no longer asked to hold a session.

Yes, I am sorry to hear that. I have seen all of this myself, particularly the problems in elderly care. I have also been left out to dry by the Church when health issues arrived. At present Christianity seems to be struggling with some significant moral issues. Of course the culture at large is also struggling in the same way, but we seem to have special evidence of the malady within the churches.

Indeed, and my constant reference to the fact that healing is central to the church seemed to alienate people who seemed to be there for other reasons. When I became ill, it seems to have driven the congregation and the pastor into passivity. We heard the same thing from victims of abuse, which of course is much worse and is probably the cause of the decades of silence about such incidents that left the victims as spiritual and psychological wrecks.

I sometimes read outside the Judeo-Christian tradition, particularly in Buddhism or Hinduism. My concern with syncretism is that it is so easy to err with syncretism in a pluralistic society. For example, at one point I found myself reading James Fredericks and Paul Knitter as I moved down that syncretic path, but eventually I realized that I was committing small errors over and over until they compounded into something quite out of line with reality. That is, once those errors began to propose the thesis that Christianity and Buddhism are similar religions, I realized that something was amiss. Even Buddhist scholars who studied in the West, such as Masao Abe, recognize the vast distance between the two religions. I actually believe he studied in your country.

I agree with you, you always have to question where you are going with what you are doing, and check your alignment with reality. Buddhism isn’t Christianity, but it is another hill from which you can gain a different perspective of your own hill. In the end, it is the discovery of common denominators that brings us together, such as compassion, and allows us to hear the stories of others profitably, and indeed distinguish the traditions. I liked Anthony de Mello for is humour, but also because he adopted some Eastern traditions to show Christians how they were in a dead-end, and make them rethink their position. He knew the difference and the Church had him investigated, because the powers that be couldn’t distinguish what he was saying, much like with many other personalities throughout the centuries.

In the same way, the experiences I have spoken about could be interpreted as invocation of the Holy Spirit, or of the Devil, depending on ones proclivity. Or they can be accepted as a simple psychological effect of flow in a group of people focused on the same subject. What you call it is down to you, and I prefer to rationalise such a discussion, rather like taking a cold shower after great excitement.

In any case, I understand some of the motivations and reasoning behind a syncretic approach, and to a large extent they make sense. I suppose I am more open to the sort of syncretism that flows from the kind of interreligious dialogue which is carried out on a scholarly level. I would even consider Merton's dialogue with Buddhism to be of this calibur.

Yes, I have several books by Merton and had them out to read recently. He too was much misunderstood and held under suspicion, although I can see his devotion clearly, and his ability to distinguish the common denominators from the traditions. His last speech before he died made that very clear to me.

[Baby Augustine]

I was a postulant for a month with the Carthusians and learned the one thing necessary.
Much of the sources cited here I do not go for. Dubay, the Carmelites, Martin Laird, Merton --- those are solid.

But Contemplation and Happiness by Pieper sets the stage for everybody else.