"God" Was A Four-Letter Word . . .

"God" Was A Four-Letter Word...

---

"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God." ~ John 1:1

---

And yet few ever bother asking what that word [Logos, transliterated from Greek: λόγος] was!

It sure as hell wasn't the Danish / Dutch / Germanic offshoot everyone is so fond of these days: G-O-D.

The Christians of Byzantium (founded by Constantine) to whom ALL contemporary believers in Christ owe their creed had a very different set of names for the 'Lord'. 

i.e. the less catchy: Hupsistos or, if you prefer: Pantocrator.

Going back further to the Hebrew Torah, it was forbidden to speak the Tetragrammaton (four letters) of YHWH, from where Jehovah is derived. Vowels were excluded — thus confounding said pronoun.

There's immense wisdom in this approach because really, how could an almighty Being be reduced to a few mere syllables, becoming sullied by the utterance of our mortal tongues?

Unfortunately, mainly due to differences in languages, most polemics regarding the existence or nature of God amount to nothing other than disagreements concerning one's preferred Signifier.

As a result, religious fundamentalism rather restricts spiritual evolution through its dogmatic use of linguistic concepts that people become emotionally attached to. It would indeed seem that Faith is largely a matter of subjective sentimentality.

Even more vexingly, these emotional tendencies can carry negative side-effects. For instance, within the blackened hearts of those firebrands where anger and hate predominate.

As a Philologist, Friedrich Nietzsche was aware of the above fallacies and famously declared that "God is dead". This is because he saw people not worshiping divinity directly, but only going through empty motions and reciting the rosary without any real reflection.

In fact, some Post-Modern thinkers have accused the whole Western Metaphysical tradition of Logocentrism; an incurable obsession with that primal WORD — leading to centuries of bloody conflict.

The Truth is that Allah / God / Krishna / Yahweh (whatever) is simply beyond the scope of finite human thought and most certainly ineffable. Now that we have entered a new millennium, it no longer serves anybody to squabble over such limiting names. We ought to move forward from here and embark on a mission of mutual comprehension!

Share |

Echoes of Emptiness

Echoes of Emptiness

"Form is no other than Emptiness and Emptiness is none other than Form." ~ Heart Sutra

---

People like to spout the above quote without having the slightest inkling about Madhyamika Buddhism.

Emptiness is the highest truth in Madhyamika (middle-way) Buddhism but it doesn't mean nothingness as nihilists might think; its meaning connotes Interdependence.

Emptiness / Interdependence has various definitions. Basically, nothing can be said to arise alone or exist solely from its own side. As for eternal essences? None can be observed anywhere, at any time!

An instance of Emptiness: sight does not occur without something to see, just as the existence of perceivable objects is affirmed only when they are seen.  Neither comes first since they arise mutually.

Madhyamika points to a conciliatory middle-path between opposite extremes that are normally thought of as mutually exclusive.  Polarized thinking is dualistic and hence probably mistaken.

Many Buddhists consider a proper understanding of Sunyata (Void / Emptiness) to be the highest realization attainable, equivalent to enlightenment itself.

Emptiness is known as Mayavadi (Voidist) philosophy by various Hindu schools of thought that reject it as Atheism. Their adherents require a personal deity to latch onto and often cannot intuit the merits of Sunyata.

This is partly due to a purely intellectual understanding of the concept, which is hardly enough.  Without regular meditative practice, Sunyata cannot actually be experienced and so fails as mere theory.

Contrary to common belief, Buddhist Sutras on Emptiness do not assert that the universe is an illusion.  That is another type of dualism reconciled by the doctrine of Two Truths.

These Two Truths are flip-sides of a coin.  On the one hand, material manifestation is regarded as 'provisional' or constantly shifting.  However, this does not imply that physical laws have no actual bearing.

On the other hand, Ultimate Reality is transcendental to the first, yet includes and encompasses it.  Form is Emptiness and Emptiness is Form, remember?  Neither is more important nor real.

Indeed as Arya Nagarjuna noted: "There is not the slightest difference between Samsara and Nirvana."  Why? Because cyclic existence and Emptiness ARE each other!

Those who think that the universe is an illusion are in the same boat as those that view God as being outside of creation and not within it.

It's not our universe that is illusory but the scummy perceptive lenses that we view it through. Even though it fluctuates, physical reality is quite sacred in character.

No doubt perception molds reality to a great extent but the fundamental matter / energy thereby molded is itself real or better said: Ethereal.

From holy visions to hallowed sounds — running the gamut from psyche to senses — these are all echoes resounding in Emptiness!

Share |