This is the greatest thing Ive read in awhile, probably because its so relevant to what I myself and many others are going through right now, a kind of sea-change of the spirit. What follows is an excerpt from a book review on Universalist Radha-Krishnaism (link to the full post below) I found on Jagadananda Dass blog. As I said to my dharma brother Spirits, its especially important for those of us even slightly beyond the more initial stages of a given path (or any bundle of paths) as it details the moral and intellectual issues, social and psychological changes, and the existential challenge of doubt we eventually (and perhaps continually) have to face in order for our faith to evolve into a purer form that is forever beyond the hopes of fundamentalism. This whole piece is replete with wisdom and clarity! Sight up! (Note: there are some foreign terms in here, but not too many.) O:) ---- Second Naiveté, Reenchantment. Some of the terms Subal borrows from liberal theology are very useful. One is hermeneutical leap, which is the leap of insight that comes when old beliefs are given apparently radical new interpretations that widen their scope and potential for meaning. Another, taken from his Old Testament professor at GTU, Marvin Chaney, is second naiveté, used to describe the renewed zest one feels for deconstructed historical, theological or mythological themes when they have been reinvigorated by a broader understanding. This indicates the richness of the renewed faith that comes when we make accept the challenge of doubt in the dialectic of faith, rather than trying to crush it with false zealotry. Disenchantment comes from the loss of a spiritual point of view due to an excess of rationalism. For many, this is dealt with by a retreat into the shell of fundamentalism or hypocrisy when the intellectual challenges become too strong. For others it results in a crisis of faith that leads to total rejection of a specific faith or of any faith at all. Those who accept the challenge of doubt and investigate religion and their own religious experiences as an objective phenomena in all their aspects—mythological, theological, philosophical, anthropological, psychological, sociological, etc.—often find that their faith takes on a new enlivened form, if their samskara (the faith based on the original religious experience) is strong enough. One then interacts with God through his symbolic manifestations with much the same innocence and love that he or she did when they were entirely new and presented themselves in all their original mystic splendor. In that state, he makes genuine further progress internally. This is what the Bhagavata [Purana] infers in 3.7.17 when it talks about going beyond intelligence. You cannot hide from reason and, if you try to suppress it, you run the risk of hypocrisy and all the ugliness it entails. Facing reason means undertaking a dark night of the soul, but the rewards are so much greater, because the nature of evolved faith is so much sweeter and satisfying than the futile struggle to remain true to received dogmas. One of the problems I see in the whole enlightenment and rationalist discourse is that it is essentially a desacralizing movement. In my own experience, certain conditions of extreme innocence and rejection of the so-called rational social order were necessary in order for me to even chant Hare Krishna and discover the sacred in the first place. Jiva Goswami talks about ruci-pradhāna and vicāra-pradhāna devotees, while making it very clear that [despite clearly being in the latter category himself] that those who can move directly into the path of sacred experience are more fortunate, for the vicāra-pradhāna devotee will only have to return there when his faith has been renewed. The trouble is that the genuine simplicity of a ruci-pradhāna devotee who never interacts with rational doubt is extremely rare. In view of my own pilgrimage, I agree that by developing a more sophisticated understanding of religious experience, we make it possible to deepen it and communicate it to a wider audience. But an overly sophisticated attitude may also make it difficult to enter into direct communion with symbols like Radha-Krishna that are Gods way of revealing himself to us. Christianity has the advantage in some ways of having dealt with modernity and its sophisticated secular critiques of religion of for a longer time than India. In many ways, India is still fighting the rearguard, trying to defend the literal word of God, however confused, hyperbolic and self-contradictory it may be. Bhaktivinoda Thakur clearly stated that the word of God is the words of inspired men, rishis or seers. It is sad that the progressive tendencies of Bhaktivinoda Thakur have been overrun by a regression to old-style fundamentalism. I have pondered over the question of whether the narrow vision of the kaniṣṭha vaiṣṇava serves some necessary function in the development of ones devotional life. But the great problem of the kaniṣṭha is that he has little understanding of what the psychological changes and real difficulties there are in stepping up to the madhyama[ka?] level. Because there are so many precious preconceived notions and cherished ideas that must be jettisoned, there is a great deal of fear that must be overcome. The sad fact is that kaniṣṭha vaiṣṇavas are the kinds of religious people who start wars and pogroms. They are also the ones who are susceptible to the greatest hypocrisies because they do not face the existential challenges of doubt and so become empty internally even as they exploit the credibility of the neophytes they surround themselves with for personal gain. One of those great fears is that of Māyāvāda. Subal has done a great service by introducing or naming the Vaishnava concept of deity as panentheism. For those who have not studied comparative religion, this term will mean nothing. But it really is the best English language term for Mahaprabhu’s acintya-bhedābheda, because while recognizing the personal nature of the God and our relationship with him, it gives full importance to the his immanence and identity with us. How this plays out in practical terms is of course something that I am deeply interested in, because it completely changes the nature of our sadhana.
Posted on: Tue, 26 Aug 2014 15:25:45 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015