To Rooson and Roker: "Every place is sacred, because sacredness comes from the Self and is radiated by it. Every place in which the renouncer sits is his ashram. Every stream in which he bathes becomes for him the Ganges." Fr. Henri Le Saux
So, yes, the sacred is all around us and in us, but why do we not (usually) see it? That goes back to the first question in the blog concerning our need for ritual, even though one would think that this would be unnecessary if the sacred is "a circle with its center everywhere and its circumference nowhere." So, to Rooson: yes, it seems to me that we have special sites that are invested with spirit. I feel that with a lot of the Anasazi ruins in the Southwest - a presence as if the past lives on into the present. It is eery and soul-expanding at the same time. But why some sites special and most others not? If the Self radiates the sacred, should it not be everywhere?
Thinking about it, I come back to the concept of original sin; for even as we have become more profane and materialistic, even traditional peoples, including autonomous Native Americans, are often profane. It is, I think, the plight of humans to be able to contemplate the sacred, something that other animals tend, rather, to simply live (although sometimes it seems they are "groking), but also to ignore it. Collectively, all human kind seems bent towards ignoring it. I do not know if an infant, raised, say, by wolves, would be naturally pure; but it is certainly the case that all of us in all the cultures of the world tend towards the profane at least some of the time.
But the sense of the sacred never leaves us entirely. It is to that sense that we dedicate certain areas of the world where, for some historical or geological reason, the sacred sense is aroused. Yes, battlefields; ancient cities; churches; large groves, large or unique mountains, etc. And we desperately need them. Those who do not "go to meetin'" because it is boring - and I hear you - might want to rethink that. As one wise man said, "yes, you say you can worship just as well in the forest. But do you?" We need to, in some way, or our deepest and most important attribute of being human, of atrophies.
So, yes, the sacred is all around us and in us, but why do we not (usually) see it? That goes back to the first question in the blog concerning our need for ritual, even though one would think that this would be unnecessary if the sacred is "a circle with its center everywhere and its circumference nowhere." So, to Rooson: yes, it seems to me that we have special sites that are invested with spirit. I feel that with a lot of the Anasazi ruins in the Southwest - a presence as if the past lives on into the present. It is eery and soul-expanding at the same time. But why some sites special and most others not? If the Self radiates the sacred, should it not be everywhere?
Thinking about it, I come back to the concept of original sin; for even as we have become more profane and materialistic, even traditional peoples, including autonomous Native Americans, are often profane. It is, I think, the plight of humans to be able to contemplate the sacred, something that other animals tend, rather, to simply live (although sometimes it seems they are "groking), but also to ignore it. Collectively, all human kind seems bent towards ignoring it. I do not know if an infant, raised, say, by wolves, would be naturally pure; but it is certainly the case that all of us in all the cultures of the world tend towards the profane at least some of the time.
But the sense of the sacred never leaves us entirely. It is to that sense that we dedicate certain areas of the world where, for some historical or geological reason, the sacred sense is aroused. Yes, battlefields; ancient cities; churches; large groves, large or unique mountains, etc. And we desperately need them. Those who do not "go to meetin'" because it is boring - and I hear you - might want to rethink that. As one wise man said, "yes, you say you can worship just as well in the forest. But do you?" We need to, in some way, or our deepest and most important attribute of being human, of atrophies.
But why? Again, we go back to original sin. Yes, it is born of free will (which is paradoxically limited, but that is another problem), but why are we naturally inclined to the profane? Or is it the de-evolution of society, as the Traditionalists might put it?
Any thoughts? Till we meet again, FK
RSS Feed