*Brian Wilcox. "unity ~ contrasts in the Light". Flickr.
Years ago, I met with my spiritual guide. She was an elderly and devout Christian contemplative of many years. She looked at me, and spoke with frustration, "I'm tired of hearing about the True Self." "True Self" is a popular use speaking of, in other wisdom paths, Atman, Buddha Nature, the Self, and so forth. I found her response informative, a sign of how speaking about the unspeakable can become unappealing, even a distraction. Words wear themselves out, so to speak, in matters of Grace. Yet, we are, nevertheless, stuck with speaking about the unspeakable, for we are creatures of words and through words, however inept and trite, we form bridges to share in Love, to express the wordless, the never and cannot be spoken. We live with and without words, and we find a way to honor both, to embrace whatever tension this may entail, to live together as embodied beings seeking our innate need for communion as one.
* * *
transcendence is not a
what has been
transcendence is an
in which what has been still is
and honored as part of a larger whole
Possibly, the most subtle misadventure in wisdom paths is creating a conceptual either-or within Life, while Life is a diversifying unity. This leads, often, to guidance that appears as a transcendence of our human bodies, feelings, and thoughts. This is a false transcendence, while to live wholly we include wholly. What was prior is transformed, but it is not absent in what becomes. Becoming never leaves anything behind. So, whether a fundamentalist view of sin or an idealistic nonduality, either of which can mislead us from a compassionate embrace of the whole, really there is no way around what we are relatively, yet, all we think we are is trans-formed again, and again, and again. Does the again ever end? Who knows?
* * *
Life cannot be divided; if divided, Life would be divided against Itself. In Theistic terms, this would be like saying, "God is against God?" Paul, an early Christian apostle asked this rhetorical question to a congregation arguing about who its spiritual leader was, "Is Christ divided?" Could the Buddha be fighting with Buddha? Maybe play fighting, nothing more. Unity being disunity is simply a logical impossibility, a no-thing. If unity is not unified, then the word "unity" is of no meaning, there being no unity.