S p i r i t ua l i t y S t u d i e s 8 - 1 S p r i n g 2 0 2 2 3 5 Samuel Bendeck Sotillos to Meister Eckhart (1260–1328), detachment “enkindles the heart and awakens the spirit and stimulates our longings and shows us where God is” (1981, 294). A paradoxical characteristic of those who abuse substances is that they are always, albeit unknowingly, affirming the Divine. This will at first glance seem curious and even nonsensical, for it has been said that “[t]he worship of God is an abomination to a sinner” (Ecclesiasticus 1:32) and “[s]urely the soul commands to evil, save whom my Lord may show mercy” (Qurʼān 12:53). Metaphysically speaking, however, whether they realize it or not, everything affirms the Divine in every thought and act, as our entire existence is woven into the sacred. As Eckhart confirmed: “Even he who blasphemes against God praises God” (2009, 26). This statement does not, then, imply that we should continue in our excess or folly. For it has also been said, “[w]hat shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound? God forbid. How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any longer therein?” (Romans 6:1–2). The Qurʼān (39:53) exhorts us, “[d]o not despair of God’s Mercy,” as the Divine forgives all transgressions. In the Pure Land tradition of Buddhism, we find the following admonition: “It is like offering more wine before the person has become sober or urging him to take even more poison before the poison has abated. ‘Here’s some medicine, so drink all the poison you like’ – words like these should never be said” (Shinran 1997, 553). Addiction can be understood from a metaphysical perspective as a deep-rooted form of idolatry. When anything is substituted for the Divine, it becomes and idol and an obstacle to the spiritual life. This is why it has been stated that “no man can serve two masters” (Matthew 6:24). Spiritual wayfarers are instructed to turn to the Divine by taking refuge in it: “Thou shalt have no other gods before me” (Exodus 20:3–5). The Divine Unity is stressed in the Hindu tradition in the following verses: the “one…without a second” (Chāndogya Upanishad 6:2:1) or “one God, the Lord of men” (Rgveda 8:25:16). This testimony is also found in the essential declaration of faith (Arabic shahādah) in Islam, “[t]here is no god but God” or “[t]here is no divinity but the Divine” (Arabic Lā ilāha illallāh). It is the Divine alone that will bring peace to the human soul; therefore, we need to sacrifice our dysfunctional dependencies to the Divine itself. Śrīmad Bhāgavatam (11:5) expresses this requirement with this exhortation: “Offer unto me that which is very dear to thee – which thou holdest most covetable. Infinite are the results of such an offering!” The spiritual traditions teach that there is a part of us which is always wedded to divine Reality. The dimension of ourselves that is caught in addictive tendencies or patterns can never compromise our primordial nature. An integral psychology informed by the perennial philosophy recognizes two distinct dimensions of human identity: one relative or horizontal, and the other Absolute or vertical (while never blurring or confusing the two). Kurt Almqvist (1912–2001) pointed out (1983, 194): One of the most important themes in religion – the most important – is the confrontation between the two ‘selves’ in man: the inner, which partakes of God’s unconditional, infinite nature and is identical with his ‘kingdom’, and the outer self, or human personality with a certain name. It is the intersection of these two dimensions that comprises the religious life. One sees man horizontally from the earthly side; the other vertically as a vehicle of divinity. The crossing point may be multiplicated both horizontally and vertically, making a cosmic web formed in one direction of layered worlds or conditions and, in the other, of the beings embodied in them – horizontal and vertical, woof and warp. Duo sunt in homine –“There are two [note: natures] in man” (Aquinas 1917, 336) was an axiom in the West prior to the emergence of the Renaissance that recognized an outer and inner aspect to our being. Ibn ‘Arabī (1165–1240) pointed out that: “In any definition of Man, his inner and outer aspect are both to be considered” (1980, 73). The theomorphic essence is unconditioned and unaffected by the activities of the world: “Everything a man does in the lower part of active life is necessarily exterior to him, so to speak, beneath him.” (Cloud of
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MzgxMzI=