| | | |

The Fallacy of Divine Right Order

Spread the love

BY HARV BISHOP

“If I hug you,” said the man sitting across from me, “that is enlightened. That is God. If I punch you in the face that is enlightened. That is God. Everything is God. We are all enlightened just as we are. The world is just an illusion.”

The man speaking was a local musician who tasted cosmic consciousness and had earned the nickname “Swami” for the wisdom that came from that experience.

Enlightenment rubics cube

I don’t doubt that he tasted something of higher consciousness, but I doubted his wisdom. But I didn’t want to appear unenlightened at that time so I let it slide.

The pop wisdom that comes from that same line of thought is “Everything is in Divine Right order.” A bomb goes off in Paris, your car breaks down, you stub your toe– it’s all divine right order. Is everything in divine right order? And what does that mean for striving for a world that works for everyone?

Now I would say that “Swami” confused Absolute Being with the Relative World where things are in constant flux. The Kabbalah, Jewish mysticism, teaches that we inherited an incomplete world so that we could be co-creators with the Divine in Tikkun Olam which translates as repair of the world.

Evolutionary spirituality says that we, as the Divine incarnate, grow into our ability to be creative with diversity rather than have it divide us. Divine right order suggests a pre-given plan to balance Oneness and diversity. But evolution and experimentation is messier than that.

How could it be otherwise in a world of seven billion plus people? Consider our varying degrees of consciousness, strong identities and prejudice based on religion, national boundaries, race and ethnicity and on top of that a mix biological drives and free will.  In such a world would we not do everything possible to evolve ways for people to play well together and mitigate the countless ways we can be cruel to each other?

The celebrated Rice University comparative religion scholar Jeffrey Kripal argues that the Absolute and the Relative don’t always play well together.

Jeffrey Kripal
Jeffrey Kripal

“Ethics and metaphysics … are not the same thing… [T]he basic problem (and promise) of quietism [acceptance of things as they are without trying to change circumstances], in almost any cultural form, is the shocking realization it can occasion that the Real has absolutely nothing to do with the social or with any sort of intentional, ritual, sacramental, or ethical action. The Real cannot be caused, cannot be effected, cannot be prayed or meditated into existence. It can only be. The infamous indifference of quietist adepts flows from this revelation. For once one ‘realizes’ the Real (one never ‘achieves’ or ‘attains’ it), one can and often must abandon the social and all attempts, including religious attempts, to “cause” or ‘effect’ the Real. After reaching this realization, all such efforts are known to be ridiculous.”

“…[T]hat no human effort can ever, in principle, affect the Real, may indeed be ontologically true. But its being true would not make it any more helpful if what one wants is a stable global community and a sustainable natural environment.”*

That perspective on Oneness can trump ethics and social action, but I would argue that a different perspective on Oneness also can provide a ground for an ethic of recognizing every one as an equally important manifestation of the Divine that cannot be diminished.

A similar point to Kripal’s was made by the legendary mythologist Joseph Campbell in his “Power of Myth” conversations with Bill Moyers. Campbell was questioning an Indian spiritual teacher.

Moyers_Campbell-480x270

“My question was,” Campbell recalled, “Since all is [Brahman], since all is a manifestation of that divine mystery, no matter how we judge it ethically, or no matter how we judge it in terms of prudence and things of this — values of this sort, it is nevertheless the divine. So should you say no to stupidity, to ignorance, to brutality, to war, to everything that the world gives?” And he says, “For you and me, this is the way.” And ever since then I’ve been confirmed in that affirmation that total affirmation, of the way life is.”

BILL MOYERS: What do you do with suffering in your life, with pain, with evil, with cruelty, with injustice?

JOSEPH CAMPBELL: There are two aspects to a thing of this kind. One is your judgment in the field of action, and the other is your judgment as a metaphysical observer. That’s the way life is. You can’t say there shouldn’t be poisonous serpents, but in the field of action, if you see a poisonous serpent about to bite somebody, you kill it. That’s not saying no to the serpent, that’s saying no to that situation. This is the whole trick — it’s a duality in the way of living.”

Campbell, clearly, was talking about non-judgment, not inaction. But it has also been written that there is a Sacred No that helps to evolve consciousness. That prophetic tradition has involved saying no to slavery, and discrimination based on race, gender and sexual orientation. It is an evolutionary driver to a larger, more inclusive yes that expands our sense of human possibilities.

Viveknanda
Swami Vivekananda

The man who brought Hindu teachings and yoga to the U.S. in the 1890s, the charismatic emissary of Ramakrishna, Swami Vivekanda, once said, “This world is like a dog’s curly tail, and people have been striving to straighten it out for hundreds of years; but when they let it go, it has curled up again. How could it be otherwise?”

But again there is important context to this quote which appears at first blush to justify inaction.

“One must first know how to work without attachment, then one will not be a fanatic. When we know that this world is like a dog’s curly tail and will never get straightened, we shall not become fanatics. If there were no fanaticism in the world, it would make much more progress than it does now. It is a mistake to think that fanaticism can make for the progress of mankind. On the contrary, it is a retarding element creating hatred and anger, and causing people to fight each other, and making them unsympathetic. We think that whatever we do or possess is the best in the world, and what we do not do or possess is of no value. So, always remember the instance of the curly tail of the dog whenever you have a tendency to become a fanatic.”

Vivakenanda was arguing for a non-attachment that would lead to progress, and more specifically tolerance, peace and justice.

The mystic and famed Findhorn teacher David Spangler addressed this dilemma in his recent autobiography “Appreciated to Spirit.” He recalled a teaching from his non-physical guide John about the difference between Oneness and Wholeness.

David Spangler
David Spangler

“Oneness for John,” Spangler writes, “was the preexisting state– the generative mystery of the Sacred — that allowed all things to be. For a person to attune to it was good when that attunement enhanced that individual’s capacities to participate in life, but John didn’t see it as a destination.”

Wholeness,  Spangler comments, was Oneness consciously realized and then, crucially, enacted in the world. Then “all beings” could “express their talents and contributions to the whole and the emergence of a more spacious and blessed world could take place.”

A recent video from the philosopher Ken Wilber also addressed the paradox of Perfect Being and a world in need of repair.

If Spirit is everything, the good and the bad and everything in between, then paradox is inevitable, Wilber says.

The paradox we must embrace, he said, is that when we touch the Ground of all Being everything is already perfect and in the relative world we are asked to “do good things and avoid evil things” and “do specific work to make the world better.”

FourthTurning-4-Wilber-600_0
Ken Wilber

The manifest world, says Wilber is “always slightly off.” “There is always something going on which means that there is always a role” for Christian Charity, Buddhist Bodhisattva and all of us “to go out and make it better.” Wilber goes as far as to say that a commitment and willingness to make things better for our world is a precondition of enlightenment.

“You realize everything is fine,” he says, “and then you go out and make it fine.”

*Andrea R. Jain and Jeffrey J. Kripal, QUIETISM AND KARMA: Non-Action as Non-Ethics in Jain Asceticism, Common Knowledge, 15, 2, Spring 2009, pp. 197-207

 

 

Similar Posts

7 Comments

  1. Well done Harvey Bishop!
    I think we need to spell it out even further. For far too long we in New Thought have used “Divine Right Order” as a crutch for not taking action in social issues (the dreaded New Thought sin of being engaged at the level of effect!). But such a position lacks awareness of the full picture of the universal order of things and further is an abdication of our capacity as agents of the Divine Itself.
    Yes, the Divine Order (the Real) cannot be “caused to or effected to change” by its nature it must be and always is. We as agents of the Divine are endowed with choice – namely the choice to be in alignment with the Divine Order or not. Thus what is the nature of the Divine Order / The Real Itself? The Universe is NOT neutral – it’s not bland aquiensence to “whatever will be, will be” – the fundamental order of the universe is built on the principle of Harmony. There is a delicate balance of all things. The universe has a vibration and that vibration expresses itself in patterns of order and harmony. Discordant notes, resolve themselves in harmony – even if it is beyond our human ears’ capacity to hear it.
    Therefore when we see injustice or disharmony in the social state – we can choose to interact in a way that aligns and affirms the fundamental order of the universal harmony – or we can choose to “just let it be.” It is true that Divine Right Order will have its way – either way. In the same way that if you are hungry – you can choose to eat (take action that restores the fundamental harmony of your body) or choose not to – and “Divine Right Order” will have its way by shutting the body down – through disease and even death – as that would be in “harmony” with the choice we made. As Agents of the Divine we have choice – capacity to see – to be holy witnesses to the manifest world, and we’ve been given the capacity to act, to restore order and play a part of affirming and amplifying the harmony of the universe. Engaging our capacity to see and act in the world of effects is a major part of how Divine Right Order is actuated. Let’s stop abdicating out of our lack of understanding and start claiming our full Divinity and Humanity, after all, Divine Right Order had us evolve into this capacity – let’s start using it.

  2. This is a really important piece. Thanks, Harv.

    This is complex because – you are exploring the nature of multidimensional reality – and all we can do is use words to describe what we wordlessly know to be true. For me, Oneness is connected to Spirit (Source), and Wholeness is a realization of being in alignment with Source. With practice (meditation, prayer, etc), a person can hold themselves in alignment for longer and longer periods. What I’ve noticed is that as my prayer practice deepens, my ability to be present is less sporadic and more regular. And stepping into Wholeness naturally leads to greater compassion and feelings of connection with others – humans, animals, and Life in general.

    1. I didn’t exactly finish the thought.
      The point is: I don’t see how consistent spiritual practice can lead you to care *less* about other people and the world. Being in Wholeness means accepting others’ suffering as part of your reality, too. So, why wouldn’t you use your talents to improve the well-being of those around you? As long as you can do this without sacrificing your alignment, your greater contribution toward the general welfare can only be good.

      1. Thank you Maryjane.
        I agree with you about the importance of recognizing and being compassionate about other’s suffering. Some want to escape other’s suffering and the world because it touches their pain and they construct beliefs to justify that. We can see it in some New Thought adherents who say, for instance, the homeless made their choices, or in the examples Dr. David mentions above. As Ken Wilber says people can experience higher states and interpret them very differently based on culture and psyche. Often the brain will translate higher states in images consistent with local deities and traditions.
        Last week this blog took extensive criticism from a far right, neo-fascist metaphysical web site. I honestly did not know such a perspective existed. In broad terms mind power takes a Darth Vader turn and is cut lose from ethics and compassion and they seek transcendence by heroically overcoming “lower” influences to become god-like. Lower influences translates to other races, modernity, the poor, and compassion is seen as weakness. Strength makes one part of the elite enlightened.

        1. Sounds like the Heaven’s Gate people. The mind can create prisons of many sorts, even when it’s spinning visions of liberation. So – we work on discernment, I guess.

  3. Paraphrasing the quote – From the Realization of Oneness I know that all is fine and I become an expression of God’s Love in the world. I am inspired to go out to do my part to to make the world a better place, but as soon as I am attached to the outcome …. I have lost my way and will become part of the problem. Ahh – return to Source and begin again!
    A thoughtful piece Harv! Thank you!

    1. Christine: I like your paraphrase.

      I would say in summary, the idea is: Giving up your ego attachment–and creating your world within a framework of love and caring for the universe you are creating moment to moment.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *