Mystic

A mystic is a person who believes that direct knowledge of spiritual truth, or ultimate reality can only be attained through one’s direct experience of the same.

Metaphysics

Metaphysics is a traditional branch of philosophy concerned with explaining the fundamental nature of existence. A person who studies metaphysics is called a metaphysicist  or a metaphysician. The metaphysicist attempts to clarify the fundamental way in which people understand existence. A central branch of metaphysics is ontology—the investigation into the basic nature of being. The word "metaphysics" derives from the Greek words μετά (meta—"beyond", "above" or "overarching") and φυσικά (physiká, "physics"). It is understood to mean "what is beyond the physical".

Religion versus Spirituality

What about the kids?―The Last Refuge of Drug War Scoundrels

The famous quote by Samuel Johnson, “Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel” seems apropos to the current situation regarding the decriminalization of cannabis. Even those who tacitly favor decriminalization are wringing their hands over what effect this might have on children. The latest salvo in this debate comes from Bill O’Reilly who awarded his “Pinhead of the Year” (now that’s the pot calling the kettle black) award to the voters of Colorado and Washington for legalizing recreational cannabis use for adults. His main point being, “What about the children?” This specious argument is frequently offered by those opposed to decriminalization as they believe it will end the debate because we as a society must protect our children from any and all “evils” they might face in their lives. In other words, we must do all we can to “child-proof” life. As far as I know, no one who is for the decriminalization of cannabis thinks it’s a good idea for children to use it. In both Colorado and Washington the law allows the possession of cannabis only to adults over 21―just as in the case of alcohol. The main thrust of those opposed to cannabis reform is two-fold. One is that by allowing adults to posses and use cannabis it sends a message that such use is socially sanctioned, thus it removes the “illegal” stigma. The second point is that by allowing the legal sale of cannabis it will make it more available to those under 21. As to the first point, we as a society have already determined that there are some things adults may do that children may not. For example, buying and using tobacco products are illegal for people under 18, yet how many tobacco users do you know that counted down the days until they were 18 so they could legally use tobacco? Likewise, how many people wait until they turn 21 to have their first drink of alcohol? Guess what―90% of people who use tobacco started BEFORE they were 18 and over 90% of young people have used alcohol (outside a family setting) BEFORE they were 21! What these statistics demonstrate is that a substance’s legality has little relationship to a person’s desire to use it. In fact studies of high school students show that less than 3% identify “Because it’s illegal” as the main reason they don’t use a substance. Then what is the primary motivation for use or not using tobacco, alcohol, cannabis, or any other substance? It is whether or not such use is supported by one’s peers. Quite simply, if your friends use it, you’re likely to use it. Tobacco use is a great example. Remember back when “everyone” smoked? If not, just watch an episode of Mad Men. In 1965, 42% of adults in the United States used tobacco. By 2011 that percentage dropped to 19%. Why? Not because tobacco was made illegal, but because social attitudes about its use changed. Most tobacco users feel like social outcasts, which is probably the most significant factor in the decrease in tobacco use over the past 50 years. And what brought about this change in social consciousness? Effective education programs about the real dangers of tobacco use that went beyond the “just say no” approach. As to the second point―availability―that horse left the barn long ago. Since the 1990s, over 71% of high school students surveyed report that cannabis is “easy to get.” Other studies have shown that cannabis (and other illegal substances) were easier to get than alcohol for those under 21. So if everyone is so concerned about young people using these substances, why hasn’t there been more of an effort to decrease their availability to this population? Why, for instance, does the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) spend so much of its resources on raiding medical cannabis dispensaries that sell only to adults, and not on high school drug dealers? Perhaps it’s because medical cannabis dispensaries are easy targets, as they are doing business in the open and not secretly in high school restrooms. Also, people under 18 don’t have a lot of assets to seize under our draconian drug forfeiture laws. If we as a society are so concerned about “the kids,” wouldn’t you think this is where the majority of law enforcement’s focus should be? Rather than busting adults who have likely been using cannabis for years, doesn’t it make more sense to try and address the problem when MOST people begin cannabis use? But what about the facts? Is there any hard evidence that there is a correlation between “legal” cannabis use and an increase in use by young people? A preliminary study suggests not. Researchers from the Universities of Montana, Oregon, and Colorado published a report in May 2012 entitled “Medical Marijuana Laws and Teen Marijuana Use” in which they sought to discover what, if any, relation there was between medical cannabis and adolescent use. Their conclusion? “Our results are not consistent with the hypothesis that legalization leads to increased use of marijuana by teenagers.” Now this is a preliminary study, but it would appears to contradict the argument that decriminalization of cannabis use for adults leads to increased use by teens. Actually, there is a counterpoint that decriminalization of cannabis under a regulated system such as is in place for alcohol could actually DECREASE availability to young people. Several studies, including one by the Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse, have demonstrated that―for people under 21―cannabis is easier to obtain than alcohol. Why? Perhaps because alcohol sales are regulated and people who provide it to those under 21 face criminal penalties, which include loss of their liquor license. With such a lucrative potential market, I doubt few proprietors selling legal cannabis would want to kill the goose laying golden eggs by selling to minors. Alcohol and tobacco kill far more people in this country that all illegal drugs combined. Cannabis, when used responsibly, is easily the most benign of common intoxicants. If we are serious about protecting children, then we should outlaw ALL potentially dangerous substances―including alcohol and tobacco. Oh, and we should also outlaw motor vehicles because they are the leading cause of teenage deaths.

Namasté

Namasté is a traditional greeting in India and Nepal (not just a way of ending a yoga class). I prefer to use this whenever possible in both greeting and saying goodbye, as this word communicates a whole concept in just one word. Namasté means that I recognize we are both an expression of the divine and I am honoring the divine within you (Namasté is accompanied with both hands in "prayer" position and a bow). It also conveys the awareness that we are essentially all one, thus there is no separation between us―we are both physical manifestations of the same essential oneness of the universe. Quite a lot to say in one word!

Each Morning I Awaken to a New Dream!

Medical Cannabis: No "Green Card" Required!

With all the debate about medical cannabis, I am never surprised by how LITTLE the average person really knows about this subject. Now I don’t claim to be an expert, but I have learned from people who are. People such as Gregory Carter, MD of the University of Washington Medical School. He has served on the Governor’s Task Force on medical cannabis. Dr. Carter is , without doubt, the most knowledgeable person in Washington state regarding the medical effects of cannabis—indeed he is likely the most knowledgeable person on this subject in the world. I had the good fortune of attending a workshop by Dr. Carter a couple years ago and was surprised by how little I knew about medical cannabis. Let’s start with the basics: the cannabis plant contains at least 85 chemicals called “cannabinoids.” The most well-known being Tetrahydrocannabinol, or THC. THC is the cannabinoid responsible for the psychoactive effects of cannabis (i.e., what makes you stoned). If it were not for THC, no one would use cannabis as a recreational intoxicant. What I did not know until Dr. Carter enlightened me, is that MOST (if not ALL) of cannabis’ medical benefits come from another cannabinoid, Cannabidiol (CBD). And, guess what? Not only is CBD absolutely, positively, in no way psychoactive—CBD helps clear THC from the system making a user LESS stoned. What are some of the known benefits of CBD? Here is a brief list: antiepileptic (anti-seizure), anxiolytic (anti-anxiety), neuroprotectant properties (nervous system/brain protection), protection against cellular damage, protecting brains from stroke, and powerful antioxidant activity which can be used in the prophylaxis and treatment of oxidation associated diseases such as cancer, Parkinson's, Alzheimer's, and autism spectrum). There is early evidence to suggest that CBD may be useful in the treatment of bipolar disorder and schizophrenia, as well as type two diabetes. Here is probably the biggest surprise: cannabis oil containing high concentrations of CBD (20%) are 100% legal in all 50 states. No “green card” required! How is this possible? Well the CBD is made from oil extracted from industrial hemp containing virtually zero THC. Since CBD isn’t a psychoactive compound, it’s not a scheduled drug. Right now, anyone who wants can order CBD hemp oil over the internet (I’m not going to tell you where since you can use Google as easy as I can). A few drops under my tongue every morning and I’ve been feeling better than I have in years. More energy, better mood—at the same time protecting me from stroke, cancer, etc. I’m really liking high CBD hemp oil!

Yule

Yule was a Midwinter festival celebrated by the indigenous Northern European people (Sámi) since the 4th century. Yule is celebrated at the time when the dark half of the year relinquishes to the light half. The events of Yule generally centered on feasting, drinking ale, and gift-giving. Yule was celebrated for three nights, beginning at Midwinter night (Winter Solstice). During the Christianization of Europe, the Yule Fest was co-opted by the Christian church as Christmas to help convert the Sámi people to Christianity.




Many of the Yule traditions continue to this day, including the “Christmas” tree, which originally symbolized eternal life (the conifer remains green throughout the Winter), and the use of reindeer (to this day, the Sámi engage in reindeer herding). Since many of the Sámi people live above the Arctic circle, the idea of “Santa Claus” living at the North Pole is also part of this mythos.




From a modern perspective, we can surmise that Yule was a festival to help the Sámi deal with what we now call “Seasonal Affective Disorder (SAD),” or the Winter blues. After spending several months inside because of the dark and cold Winter, the Midwinter Yule festival helped lift people’s spirits so they could make it to Spring without first committing suicide due to a combination of the long, dark days and “cabin fever” (having to stay inside for weeks at a time).

The Right Tool for the Job

You wouldn’t want to use a hammer for a job needing a chain saw (or vice versa). And even if it did “work” to some degree, it wouldn’t do as good or efficient a job. Likewise, using the wrong “tool” to understand the Universe and our place within it will either not work, or will partially work–but not as well.

I am speaking about the science versus spirituality pseudo debate. Science is the right “tool” for understanding some aspects of our experience, whereas spirituality is a better “tool” for other aspects. Using the wrong tool for the job at hand is what creates this false dichotomy.

For example, if you want to explain HOW the Universe and the life within were created, spirituality–particularly organized religion–is a poor tool. Science is a superior tool for understanding the “how” of  experience. However, knowing how the Universe, etc. came into being doesn’t tell us much about WHY these things happened. In other words, science as a tool can only tell us so much and only about some things. Beyond this, we need a different tool. Spirituality, philosophy, metaphysics, and–yes–even organized religion can provide us with information beyond the scope of science.

One place where I see this most clearly is in the field of psychology. At one end you have the Medical model Behaviorists who desperately want psychology to be a “hard” science. On the other, are the Humanists who believe the complexity of the human psyche can never be reduced to brain chemistry and simple stimulus-response reactions. Yes, there is a “science” aspect of psychology, but there is also an “art” aspect. Every study shows that the best psychotherapeutic outcomes result from a combination of appropriate medication (when warranted)–the science piece–and counseling/therapy–the art piece.

In trying to understand our place within the cosmos, we need the same combination of science (astrophysics, quantum mechanics, etc.) and art (philosophy, spirituality, metaphysics, etc.). 

The Tao: Noun or Verb?

According to the World English Dictionary, in traditional grammar a verb is “any of a large class of words in a language that serve to indicate the occurrence or performance of an action.” The same source defines a noun as “a word or group of words that refers to a person, place, or thing” With this as a frame of reference, I believe that in order to properly understand the concept of Tao, it should be viewed as a verb.

.

Tao (Wade-Giles), or Dao (Pinyin) is a conception of ancient Chinese philosophy–particularly Taoism–that is traditionally translated as “way,” or “path.” As such, it is typically viewed as a noun or name. During nearly 40 years of studying the contextual usage of Tao–both in Taoist and Buddhist texts–I have come to understand it as referring to an action (verb). In this sense, a more accurate translation might be “process.”

The foundational text of Taoism–the Tao Te Ching (Wade-Giles), or Dao De Jing (Pinyin)–dates back to the 6^th century B.C.E. and is considered to be the primary source for understanding the concept of the Tao. Using this as a guide, let us consider how one’s understanding of Tao changes with its use as a verb rather than a noun.

The first chapter of the Tao Te Ching (Feng & English, 1972) begins:

The Tao that can be told is not the eternal Tao.

The name that can be named is not the eternal name.

The nameless is the beginning of Heaven and Earth.

The named is the mother of the ten thousand things.

The first two lines indicate that the Tao that can be spoken of or named is not the eternal Tao. In an interesting bit of synchronicity, “name” is synonymous with “noun” in English grammar. Now I doubt that Lao Tzu–the mythological author of the Tao Te Ching–had English grammar in mind when writing about the Tao, but when translated into English, the text appears to be saying that the Tao cannot be named. Thus (at least from the standpoint of English grammar) it is not a noun.

The third line tells us that the “nameless” is the beginning of Heaven and Earth. If the nameless is a verb, indicating an action, then the Tao is the process that begets the material Universe (matter = noun). Then in line four, matter (the named) becomes the origin of everything thereafter.

From this line of thought, the first four lines of the Tao Te Ching are in essence saying that an ineffable, nameless action gives rise to that which can be named–matter. Matter–that which can be named–in turn, gives us everything else.

If we apply this concept to modern astrophysics, we could interpret the Tao as the action underlying the “Big Bang.” After all, the “Big Bang” was an event–not a thing–because prior to it, “things” (matter and a Universe in which it could be) did not exist.

We can further apply this principle to virtually any other domain with the Tao being understood as a nameless action underlying its named manifestations– life, growth, evolution, etc.

This reinforces the idea that Taoism is essentially pantheistic in that the Tao is not a “creator” (noun) as such, but rather the action (verb) infused throughout creation. It would also lend support to the concept that matter is not the foundation of being. Rather it is action which gives rise to being.

As a side note, in another instance of synchronicity, while looking up synonyms for the word “process”–the word “route” was listed. This brings us full circle back to the English translation of Tao as path. Perhaps in the subtleties of translating Chinese into English over the year this concept of Tao as a verb, rather than a noun, was lost.

I would invite you to ponder these thoughts as you study the Tao.

The Breath of God

I just finished reading the novel “The Breath of God” by Jeffry Small and it was a delight on many levels. The story is in the style of “The DaVinci Code” in that it is built around a real-life event. In this case, the event was a report by a Russian novelist (in 1887) that he saw a document in a Buddhist monastery in northern India suggesting that Jesus (yes, THAT Jesus) may have spent several years from his adolescence through his twenties studying Hinduism and Buddhism in India, prior to returning to start his own ministry in Judea. The story concerns a doctoral candidate from Emory University who is writing his dissertation on this legend.  While in India trying to find evidence, he learns the documents were moved to Bhutan shortly after their discovery. Some evangelical Christians get wind of this and want to find and destroy the documents—using the help of an ex-military Christian terrorist— before they can be scientifically verified. Within the cloak-and-dagger storyline, the author (Jeffrey Small—acclaimed writer and speaker on religion and spirituality) weaves in ideas on the mystic origins of Hinduism, Buddhism, Christianity, and even Islam. I highly recommend it!

Chacaruna

Chacaruna: (n) Literally, bridge person. The Incan name for a Shamanic guide who helps others to cross from one state of consciousness to other states of consciousness.

Ann Druyan–Writer, Producer, Activist

I wanted to share a quote by Ann Druyan, wife of the late Carl Sagan. I believe it captures the essence of the Taoist and Pantheist vision.

"The God of Spinoza, the God of Einstein is our ability to understand nature. That’s how we worship what is sacred, what is holy, by trying to find the deepest understanding of nature. Our bias against this is so strong you can hear it in the word “supernatural”–above the natural. As if our fantasies and our little stories that we make up, whether we made them up 10,000 years ago, or 5,000 years ago, or this week, as if our stories could compete with the reality of nature as revealed by science."

Death, Birth, and Reincarnation

All is impermanent,

All is without a self.

–The Buddha

Today I have had some time to reflect and allow various ideas that have been bouncing off the walls of my skull to coalesce. These ideas were inspired by several films that I have seen recently and that I highly recommend to those on the mystic journey. The one that has dominated my consciousness today is Sukhavati–A Mythic Journey from the collected works of the late Joseph Campbell. This film has helped to flesh out many of the ideas I gleaned from The Quantum Activist, a film about Dr. Amit Goswami’s theories about the nature of existence based upon his lifelong study of physics.

These films and others have allowed me to greatly expand upon an insight I have been playing with for the past several years. It’s difficult for me to put it succinctly into a type of “Executive Summary,” so please bear with me as I try to put it all into words. The central idea has to do with what happens after one’s physical body dies, but it spins off in several different directions from there.

I’ll start with the seed of an idea that has been germinating for some time. As a minister, I was asked by a woman who was terminally ill to talk with her about death. I knew her from having conducted her marriage ceremony a few years earlier. The main question she had was, of course, “What happens after we die?”

I asked her if she wanted the truth or some bullshit answer that might make her feel better. She opted for the truth, so I said that I honestly did not know, but that shortly she would. I also told her that fear and excitement were physiologically identical–it is only how we view them that makes the experience of them differ. She was about to go on a great adventure–the next stage in whatever it is that we are all doing here–and that she could choose to begin the journey feeling fear or excitement.

I don’t know if any of that helped her, but she said it did. A few weeks later, I officiated at her funeral.

This encounter got me seriously pondering humanity’s age-old question of what’s next after this. So I began as I often do with the principles of Taoism. Taoism says that the answers we seek can be found in the natural world. The first question that came to me was, “What happens to the material body when it dies?” The answer–it returns to from whence it came. The Taoists often refer to this as “returning to the source.”

All the material “stuff” that is the body almost immediately begins to decompose so that its stuff can return to the Earth and be recycled. What if the same is true for our non-material stuff? Does that which briefly inhabited the body go back from whence it came and, if so, from whence did it come?

I initially had the idea of a sort of “spiritual compost bin” where the elements that made-up the non-material also decomposed. I didn’t go much further with this until I became aware of Dr. Goswami’s theories via The Quantum Activist.

The core tenant of Dr. Goswami is that consciousness, not matter, is the ground of being–that matter comes forth from consciousness, rather than the other way around. This is actually a very ancient idea in religious traditions, but basically turns science upside down. Undifferentiated consciousness (Dr. Goswami uses the term “non-local consciousness”) is the “pool” from which differentiated or individual consciousness is drawn. This, to me, answered the “from whence it came” question.

The only “problem” with this idea is that it really is a buzz kill for all those people who believe in the individual consciousness continuing to exist after death. So my next stop was Buddhism.

In the film Sukhavati–A Mythic Journey, Joseph Campbell describes the “lake of bliss” where one’s consciousness arrives upon achieving Nirvana. All along the shore of the lake, all the creatures (birds, animals, etc.) are chanting “All is impermanent, All is without a self.” This was the key that seemed to unlock the puzzle so the other pieces could fall into place.

The Buddha taught that there is no self–that the idea of different, individual selves is an illusion. This is the basis of the greeting “Namaste.” It is the acknowledgement that we are not two, but one. Extrapolated out–we are not 7 billion, we are one.

So just as the body is a brief assemblage of material elements that returns to the source, so it is with the non-material. And I feel the word “consciousness” fits better than “spirit” or “soul” as these historically imply an individual consciousness that continues to exist.

This also illuminates the idea of reincarnation. Most people view the concept of reincarnation as the individual “spirit” or “soul” being reborn into a new body. With this new insight, I believe that reincarnation was never meant to be about an individual consciousness being reborn, but rather about the “stuff” of consciousness being recycled–just as the material elements of the body are recycled with each new birth.

One of the things Dr. Goswami discusses in The Quantum Activist is that he had a dream in which he was very clearly told, The Tibetan Book of the Dead is true and that it is his job to prove it. Well this fits in rather nicely. The Tibetan Book of the Dead is about how to guide one through the Bardo–the intermediate state between death and rebirth.

Traditionally, of course, the idea of the death-to-rebirth journey is viewed as something the individual consciousness (spirit) does. It now seems to me that what the Bardo refers to is the intermediate state when the individual consciousness is travelling from death to the “pool” of undifferentiated consciousness. It is then reincarnated from the pool–not as the individual consciousness that it was–but as a new assemblage of “recycled” elements of consciousness.

This could also fit within the Judeo-Christian-Muslim tradition if one views “Heaven” as the return to undifferentiated consciousness (which, coincidently is what Dr. Goswami refers to as “God”).

This would, if one were looking for it, also provide an explanation for the phenomena of ghosts. Ghosts being individual consciousness becoming stuck in the Bardo. In fact that is the purpose of the Tibetan Book of the Dead–to keep one from getting stuck. This would imply that being stuck after death of the body as an individual “spirit” is not a good thing.

Using the analogy of water: when a body is alive, it is the vessel that holds the water (consciousness). When the body dies, the vessel breaks and the “water” returns to the ocean from whence it came. When a new vessel (body) is created, it is filled with water (consciousness) from the ocean. Yes, there may be some elements of the former vessel’s water in the new vessel, but it also contains water from many other broken vessels. If the water can’t get back to the ocean, it gets stuck becoming a stagnant pool (a ghost, or a soul in Hell).

Just some thoughts during the confluence of Earth Day (material) and Easter (spiritual). Namaste!

Mysticism: The Path Less Traveled

 

Mysticism is one of the least traveled spiritual paths. The reason is simple–the journey of the mystic begins where all paths end–entering uncharted territory and traveling alone.

The mystic is not satisfied with intellectual answers to the basic questions of human existence–those are called “philosophers.” Mystics, as the name implies, want to dive headlong into the mysterious experience of existence. The philosopher looks at the ocean and speculates about its nature, the mystic jumps in with both feet and isn’t afraid to get wet. Religious philosophers or theologists debate orthodoxy. But mystics go where no orthodoxy exists.

This is why the Buddha–a mystic–said not to take anything to be true on anyone else’s authority (even his own), but to discover the truth for one’s self. Mystics are like scientists in this regard, which may be one reason why many mystics and scientists (particularly quantum physicists) often appear to be describing the same reality. Perhaps when mysticism and science go far enough, they meet each other traveling in different directions.  

But does this mean the mystic must start the journey as a completely empty vessel? No–the mystic needs to prepare his/her mind by first building a foundation of intellectual understanding. This is why, quite often, mystics are older and (hopefully) wiser when they begin their journey. After years of study–when the answers found elsewhere are no longer enough and armed with a framework of knowledge to help guide the way–the mystic journey begins.

Gnostic Gospels

With Easter approaching, I thought I would share some recent thoughts on Jesus and the New Testament. Now keep in mind what I am speaking of occurred during the First century and–admittedly–I was not present (at least not in this form) and, I’m guessing, neither were you. Also, consider that the earliest gospels were written at least 10 years after Jesus died. Prior to that, they were part of an oral tradition (back then, only a few people could read and write). Therefore all of this is speculation, but speculation based upon the available historical records.

Ask anyone who is more than a Christian in name only and they will dutifully tell you the names of the four New Testament gospels of the apostles–Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. But many of even the most devote Christians don’t know, or haven’t ever heard that these are not the only gospels. Apostolic gospels not contained in the New Testament include the gospels of Thomas, Peter, Philip, Judas, and Mary Magdalene.

So if these gospels were based upon the experience of those who actually knew Jesus, why are they not included in the New Testament? To understand this, we need to look at the history of Christianity from the time of Jesus’ crucifixion to 325 AD.

For almost 300 years after Jesus’ death, there was no established Christian church or religious canon. “Christians” were a largely secret sect of Judaism. Early Christian’s had to hide their religion as there was no First Amendment protecting religious minorities. At the time, there were many different gospels in circulation–none officially sanctioned by “the Church” because there was no church as such to sanction them.

It wasn’t until the Roman emperor Constantine converted to Christianity that the Christian religion as we know it today was established. Constantine formed the First Council of Nicaea in 325 AD to establish an “official” Christian church and liturgical canon. At the Council the early Church fathers decided what and–perhaps more importantly–what not would be included in the Church’s official canon. Those that made the cut were included in the New Testament. Those that didn’t were considered heretical and–as has remained the custom–burned.

Most of us would have never known about the non-canonical gospels if it were not for a farmer from the Egyptian town of Nag Hammadi. In 1945 while tilling the soil, the farmer found a sealed urn which contained documents dating back to the 3^rd and 4^th centuries. Speculation is that an early Christian sect–the Gnostics–hid these documents to protect them from the post-Nicaean purge. This find was called the Nag Hammadi library and contained some of the earliest historical documents of early Christianity.

So why were these excluded from the New Testament by the Church fathers? Well of course the “official” Church line is that they were heresy. Must be some pretty bad stuff, right?

Well let’s take a look at what’s so “bad” in these gospels that the early Church deemed them unfit for human consumption–especially since much of their content did not differ significantly from the canonical gospels. Let’s start with the Gospel of Thomas.

The Gospel of Thomas dates to between 60 and 140 AD. Many scholars believe the Gospel of John was written after the Gospel of Thomas and that much of John’s gospel was written to refute that of Thomas. The Gospel of Thomas was likely considered dangerous to the establishment of the early Church in that it really emphasized Jesus’ teaching that the Kingdom of Heaven is within you. It basically quoted Jesus as saying that God was not outside us, but inside us. That he (Jesus) was not special–that anyone could have what he had attained by recognizing their inner divinity (Namaste Jesus!).

Well this implies that to be a “Christian” one needs to follow a mystic path of direct connection with the God within–rather than to use priests and the church as a go-between to ask favors of a god-in-the-sky. Not a good thing if you are trying to establish a corporate church with ordained clerics as its salesmen. If people are taught that the Church and its clergy are unnecessary middlemen, it does not bode well for the collection plate.

In the Nag Hammadi manuscripts, the Gospel of Philip was bound together with the Gospel of Thomas. It contained much of the same mystic language, but what was probably even more problematic was that it contained evidence that Jesus and Mary Magdalene were married! The whole idea of things such as virgin birth and religious figures who do not succumb to the temptations of the flesh furthers the idea that these people are “special.” If you want to emulate them, you must remain chaste/celibate. You can’t be truly “holy” and “human” at the same time.

But there’s an even more “dangerous” part of Philip’s gospel. Consider this passage:

And the companion of the Savior was Mary Magdalene. Christ loved Mary more than all the disciples, and used to kiss her often on her mouth. The rest of the disciples were offended by it and expressed disapproval. They said to him "Why do you love her more than all of us?" The Savior answered and said to them, "Why do I not love you like her? When a blind man and one who sees are both together in darkness, they are no different from one another. When the light comes, then he who sees will see the light, and he who is blind will remain in darkness.

Holy sh*t! Not only is Jesus “kissing her often on her mouth,” but he is implying that she is the only one of the apostles who “will see the light.” Mary Magdalene–a woman–the only one of the apostles who will see the light! No wonder the male-dominated Church wanted this put to the torch. But it wasn’t enough to try burning all evidence of this. The Church also began a whisper campaign about Mary being a prostitute to further erode any legitimacy she might have.

At this point, there can be little wonder why the Church tried to erase the Gospel of Mary Magdalene from history. Not only would this put her on equal footing with the male apostles, but it would further establish that Jesus considered her the most spiritually worthy of his followers.

The Gospel of Mary Magdalene dates to between 80 and 120 AD. Since the discovery of the Nag Hammadi library, two other fragments of the Gospel of Mary have been found. Unlike Philip’s gospel, Mary’s does not speak about her personal relationship with Jesus (although a good portion of it is missing). The core of it relates to Mary’s encounter with Jesus after the Resurrection. It was in this encounter that Jesus gave Mary his final teaching.

Let’s divert for a moment and look at just how important Mary Magdalene is in the life of Jesus. She was the only one who stood by Jesus during the crucifixion. All the men were busy hiding and trying to save their own skin. She was the one to whom Jesus revealed himself after the Resurrection. And she was the one to whom Jesus gave his final teaching. These three things are not disputed in any gospel. Add to that the possibility that she may have been his wife and, if not, was most certainly his “girlfriend” and the case can easily be made that she was the most important person in Jesus’ adult life.

So what about this “final teaching?” What did Jesus allegedly say upon revealing himself to Mary? Here’s what she had to say:

I saw the Lord in a vision and I said to him, “Lord, I saw you today in a vision.” He answered and said to me: “Blessed are you, that you did not waver at the sight of me. For where the mind is, there is the treasure.” I said to him, “So now, Lord, does a person who sees a vision see it through the soul or through the spirit?”

Jesus responds that the inner self is composed of soul, spirit, and mind, and visions are seen and understood in the mind. If you think this sounds a lot like Buddhism–you're right. Remember, no one has a copyright on the truth.

When Mary tries to relay this message to the other apostles, many don’t believe her. Andrew responds: “Say what you think concerning what she said. For I do not believe that the Savior said this. For certainly these teachings are of other ideas.”

Peter, Mary’s long-time rival, also chimes in: “Did he then speak secretly with a woman, in preference to us, and not openly? Are we to turn back and all listen to her? Did he prefer her to us?”

I believe this last statement by Peter encapsulates the attitude of the Church regarding the role of women and why the Gospel of Mary Magdalene was such heresy.

If you consider that the Council of Nicaea established a tradition of the Church doing everything it can to eliminate anything that would usurp its male-dominated power–you can easily see the roots of the inquisition, resistance to the Protestant reformation, and the Salem witch trials. Today the Catholic (Roman) Church continues to demand an unmarried priesthood and steadfastly refuses to allow women any positions of power within the Church.

What all of these so-called “Gnostic Gospels” document is that Jesus taught that God is not only without, but within. And that the path of the true seeker is to turn inward. Just some thoughts as we prepare to celebrate rebirth.

The Quantum Activist

I highly recommend the documentary The Quantum Activist (http://www.quantumactivist.com/) about Dr. Amit Goswami. His theory that consciousness, not matter, is the ground of being demonstrates that science and spirituality are but two sides of one coin. Follow one and you will find the other. Trust me, this will rock your world.

Zen Ox Herding

Heavily influenced by Taoism, the Zen Ox Herding poems are a parable for the journey to enlightenment–the Ox serving as a metaphor for the differentiated ego. I offer a reverently edited version of a new translation by Lewis Hyde for your amusement.

I:  Searching for the Ox

Alone in the deep woods, searching in darkness.

Flood-swollen rivers, mountains beyond mountains,

The trail endless and unchanging.

Bone-tired, heart-weary, the search seems hopeless.

II: Seeing the Traces

In the woods, along the riverbank, strange marks all around.

What has bent the sweet grass down just there?

The deepest canyons, the highest peaks–

Nothing can hide the imprint of the Ox.

III: Finding the Ox

The meadowlark sings, sitting on a branch.

Warm sun, light breeze, green willows by the river.

The Ox stands right there;

Where could it hide?

IV: Catching the Ox

He holds the rope with all his might,

The Ox is two-thousand pounds of old habit.

One moment it runs to the high meadows,

Then gets lost in fog-bound river bottoms.

V: Taming the Ox

Without the whip and rope near at hand,

The Ox will soon seek out the nearest muddy wallow.

But, care for it properly and it becomes gentle.

Following willingly, the rope gone slack.

VI:  Riding Home

Riding home on the back of the Ox, he is in no hurry.

Evening mist absorbs the flute tones.

Their harmony carries his heart to the horizon line.

Grass alone is not what keeps this Ox alive.

VII: Ox Forgotten

Arriving home, the Ox disappears.

He sits by himself, content.

His reverie does not bear the marks of time.

The rope and whip lie forgotten.

VIII:  Self and Ox Forgotten

Empty whip, empty rope, empty Ox, empty human being.

"The vast blue sky" is not at all the vast blue sky.

Think of snow falling on a blazing fire.

Just there the spirit of the ancient masters is fully present.

IX:   Back to the Beginning

Seeking the Source, the One True Origin: why all this hard work?

Better to stay at home as if ears and eyes had never opened.

He sits in the cabin. There is nothing to seek beyond the gate.

The streams flow and flowers open, vividly red.

X:  Entering the Village Bestowing Bliss

Barefoot, he walks into the villiage.

Dusty, spattered with mud, how broadly he grins!

He has no need of magic powers.

Near him the withered trees come into bloom again.

Let's Make Peace in the "War" on Drugs

For the past several weeks I have been violating one of the first rules of blogging–posting often so people will keep coming back to see what’s new. Well first off I don’t post unless I have something I really want to discuss and, second, I doubt the two or three people who accidently stumble upon my blog are standing by by their computers with baited breath waiting for my next post. But I am once again hearing the voice of my muse, so welcome or welcome back as the case may be.

Today while walking my dog during a rare sunny day during the Northwest Winter, I was pondering an ongoing issue for me, the so-called “War on Drugs.” Now please excuse me if I begin by getting political for awhile (I’ll bring it around to spirituality eventually). Last night I watched the documentary “aka Tommy Chong.” It’s about how the U.S. Justice Department spent over $12 million dollars of our tax money to persecute, er, I mean prosecute Tommy Chong (of Cheech and Chong fame) for selling glass bongs over the internet. It once again reminded me that in the history of U.S. drug laws, the laws have very little to do with the drugs themselves and much more to do with the people who are using them.

Tommy and his family had a business making hand-crafted blown glass bongs (water pipes for smoking whatever one might want to smoke in them) over the internet. Now if you were to Google “bong” you would find that the Chongs are far from the only entrepreneurs engaged in this enterprise. Most likely because of his notoriety, the Justice Department decided to make an example of Tommy and set-up an elaborate sting to arrest him. I won’t go into the details, but suffice to say that this was a case of entrapment by even the most conservative of definitions. I’m sure the case would have been thrown out on appeal if the Justice Department had not coerced Tommy into taking a plea bargain in exchange for not prosecuting his wife and sons. He ended up doing six months in Federal prison. All totaled the sting and prosecution cost over $12 million tax dollars Don’t you feel much safer now that the Chong family is out of the bong business?

This is but one example of our country’s enormous waste of time and money fighting an unwinnable “war” on drugs (not that a war being unwinnable has ever stopped us before). Those who know me have heard me opine about this ad nauseum. Some find it incongruent that I would have such an opinion given my chosen profession. However, as I am quick to point out, I’m not in the business of law enforcement–I’m in the business of helping people who have problems.

I am becoming increasingly convinced that the Federal government–particularly the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA)–have used the “war on drugs” just like they have used the “war on terror” to extort our income and ignore our civil rights.

Example one–medical marijuana. Several states have enacted laws allowing for the use of marijuana for treatment of certain medical conditions, but you would never know this from the perspective of the DEA. They not only prosecute people engaged in medical marijuana use (in states where it has been allowed), but they coerce local law enforcement to go along with them by using the threat of withdrawing Federal money to local law enforcement.

Example two–legitimate spiritual use of traditional psychoactive plant substances (see, I told you I’d get back to spirituality). With the current make up of the U.S. Supreme Court, unanimous decisions are rarer than polite words coming out of Ann Coulter’s mouth. Yet in 2006 they rendered a unanimous decision in supporting the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) finding in favor of the União do Vegetal (UDV) church in New Mexico. The UDV is one of two Brazilian-based churches that use ayahuasca (a plant-based brew containing DMT–a Schedule I controlled substance) as a religious sacrament. U.S. Customs had seized a shipment of plant material used to make ayahuasca and UDV sued over the seizure. These plants–although they naturally contain DMT–are not illegal under U.S. law, therefore Customs officials were acting on their own in seizing the shipment, but the DEA and Justice Department supported the Customs seizure. In the decision–written by none other than Chief Justice John Roberts–the Court affirmed the UDV’s right under the RFRA to use ayahuasca as a religious sacrament, as has been done in Brazil for centuries before the first Europeans set foot in the New World. Despite this ruling, U.S. Customs continues to seize shipments of plants used for brewing ayahuasca. Unfortunately, I found this out the hard way and don’t have the money to sue the U.S. government, but fortunately there are sources for these plants within the U.S. (DMT-containing plants are found throughout the world and grow naturally on every continent except Antarctica).

Now I’m not arguing that any 10-year-old should be able to walk into a 7-11 and buy a dime bag of black tar heroin, or that anyone should smoke a bowl of pot before getting behind the wheel of an automobile. What I am saying is let’s bring some common sense to the discussion instead of dichotomizing it into an all-or-none a-drug-is-a drug debate. Every study done on marijuana use in the U.S. has shown that there has been zero change in over 30 years. Anyone in the U.S. who wants to smoke marijuana can. Almost half of the U.S. adult population has tried marijuana. Over 50% of high school students will try marijuana before they graduate. All this despite the billions of dollars spent during this time on marijuana alone.

They say those who don’t learn from history are doomed to repeat it. Well, we evidently didn’t learn from alcohol prohibition, the Vietnam war, or the war on drugs. The correct strategy when one is in an unwinnable war is not to keep fighting–it’s to make peace. As Merle Haggard said in a song a few years ago, "Where's all the freedom we're fighing for?"

Dude! And other Sacred Shit

Found a kindred spirit with an interesting blog. You might want to check it out. http://www.dudeandothersacredshit.blogspot.com/