|
|
 |
|
| Author |
 Topic  |
|
|
Sparkle
Ireland
1457 Posts |
 Posted - Apr 08 2008 : 04:12:05 AM
|
I attended a Zen Mindfulness Retreat about a week ago.
The main monk was an ex-catholic priest, who left the priesthood, became a stockbroker, and went through a number of wives and partners. With his last partner set up a community of mindfulness, then after a few years they separated and she became a nun and he a monk
So this guy had a lot of interesting things to share in the crossover between Buddhism and Christianity.
One of the things he touched on in a Dharma talk was the Unworthiness Complex. How we often seem to feel unworthy about our spirituality.
That even during meditation a mantra started repeating in me. It will be familiar to many:
"Lord I am not worthy to receive you"
"Lord I am not worthy to receive you"
"Lord I am not worthy to receive you"
The full phrase is:
"Lord I am not worthy to receive you", but only say the word and my soul shall be healed." and is said at every mass at communion time - the most important ritual and celebration in the Christian Church.
As the mantra was repeating, it gathered momentum, I was observing it like some animal in a race inside me. I had to make a strong mental effort and say STOP, several times and replace it with:
"Lord I am one hundred percent worthy to receive you, you are me and I am you"
The original phrase above is one that is not only repeated during mass, but also by a lot of Christians throughout their ordinary prayer life. It was one of my little prayers that has been repeated many thousands of times over the years.
Interesting how ingrained this stuff gets and how it lies buried inside us waiting to be uncovered by inner silence and a little nudge from an ex-catholic priest
|
|
|
Wolfgang
Germany
470 Posts |
Posted - Apr 08 2008 : 04:32:03 AM
|
Hi Louis,
yes, that is quite a powerful wording by the catholic church.
Some years ago when I started to reflect on this and on the
meaning of unworthiness, I then consciously changed the wording
for me like this: "Lord, I am worthy to receive you, and you need
only speak one word, and my soul is healed"
Quite a challenge when I said this out loud during mass ;-)
There is another wording in the Lord's Prayer which I changed
for myself, it's about the "Do not lead us into temptation".
Actually I found an old version (in german) of the Lord' Prayer,
and it translates to something like: "Lead us when we are tempted".
(a bit difficult to translate from german to english, but I guess
you get the meaning)
Wolfgang |
 |
|
|
Balance
USA
967 Posts |
Posted - Apr 08 2008 : 11:54:59 AM
|
Hi Louis.
You have made a beautiful change to that prayer. Your experience shows transcendance.
I was thinking though from my own experience that maybe there is something of value to admit that the illusion of separate self I suffer is inadequate in its apparent separateness, in that the "I" may be "unworthy" by standing in the way of the flow of divine love.
Perhaps both mantras may have equal value to some at different times?
Just pondering. Thanks for sharing that.
|
|
|
|
Sparkle
Ireland
1457 Posts |
Posted - Apr 08 2008 : 12:25:58 PM
|
Wolfgang said:quote:
yes, that is quite a powerful wording by the catholic church.
Some years ago when I started to reflect on this and on the
meaning of unworthiness, I then consciously changed the wording
for me like this: "Lord, I am worthy to receive you, and you need
only speak one word, and my soul is healed"
Quite a challenge when I said this out loud during mass ;-)
I guess you are way ahead of me on that on that one Wolfgang. I never bothered much about the wordings, most of them didn't make much sense to my experiences at the time, but was happy enough to know that the intention was ok somewhere along the line.
The power of the mantra repetitions however took me by surprise, I hadn't realised this "live thing" was inside me like that
That must have been quite a challange for you to say it out loud at mass
Hi Alan quote:
You have made a beautiful change to that prayer. Your experience shows transcendance.
I was thinking though from my own experience that maybe there is something of value to admit that the illusion of separate self I suffer is inadequate in its apparent separateness, in that the "I" may be "unworthy" by standing in the way of the flow of divine love.
Perhaps both mantras may have equal value to some at different times?
Just pondering. Thanks for sharing that.
Thanks Alan, I get you're drift all right, but somehow I don't think the majority of the people saying this prayer would be tuned into that way of looking at it.
It seems to go along with so much of the "put downs", like guilt and shame and mortal sins and hell etc. It needs a good overhaul me thinks. |
|
|
|
david_obsidian
USA
2602 Posts |
Posted - Apr 08 2008 : 1:02:36 PM
|
What about 'Lord I am not healed -- only say the word and I shall be worthy and receive you'.
|
|
|
|
Balance
USA
967 Posts |
Posted - Apr 08 2008 : 1:13:43 PM
|
Louis said:
"Thanks Alan, I get you're drift all right, but somehow I don't think the majority of the people saying this prayer would be tuned into that way of looking at it.
It seems to go along with so much of the "put downs", like guilt and shame and mortal sins and hell etc. It needs a good overhaul me thinks."
Gee. I sure hope some controlling organization doesn't come along and take advantage of all those people!
 |
Edited by - Balance on Apr 08 2008 1:17:12 PM |
|
|
|
Sparkle
Ireland
1457 Posts |
Posted - Apr 08 2008 : 1:44:31 PM
|
David said:quote:
What about 'Lord I am not healed -- only say the word and I shall be worthy and receive you'.
Well does that still not imply that one is not "worthy" or "good enough".
But, it's whatever works for any particular person. Prior to the "unworthiness complex" trigger, I never gave it any thought.
But if one was to make a proposition to the church on how to reword it for general consumption, that's a different matter.
How about:
"Lord I am fully worthy to receive you, infact I don't need to receive you at all because you already reside in every cell and every molecule of my being, allow me to wake up and experience this, thank you, thank me."
Alan said:quote:
Gee. I sure hope some controlling organization doesn't come along and take advantage of all those people!
Surely, there aren't any organisations like that around |
|
|
|
david_obsidian
USA
2602 Posts |
Posted - Apr 09 2008 : 12:34:10 PM
|
Well does that still not imply that one is not "worthy" or "good enough.
Yes, but in a good sort of way. The idea here is that you cannot truly be worthy -- the healing makes the worthiness. I think that isn't a trap if you approach it right. The saints were generally very aware of being 'sinners', but it didn't bother them. As some of them see it, righteousness belongs to god alone. Jesus said something like that, forget the exact quote. ('Nothing is good except god alone', or something like that.)
|
|
|
|
Katrine
Norway
1813 Posts |
Posted - Apr 09 2008 : 2:34:02 PM
|
quote:
"Lord I am fully worthy to receive you, infact I don't need to receive you at all because you already reside in every cell and every molecule of my being, allow me to wake up and experience this, thank you, thank me."
Great, Louis
I am still laughing.....
..."my beeing"...indeed  |
|
|
|
Katrine
Norway
1813 Posts |
Posted - Apr 09 2008 : 2:38:57 PM
|
quote:
Yes, but in a good sort of way. The idea here is that you cannot truly be worthy -- the healing makes the worthiness. I think that isn't a trap if you approach it right. The saints were generally very aware of being 'sinners', but it didn't bother them. As some of them see it, righteousness belongs to god alone. Jesus said something like that, forget the exact quote. ('Nothing is good except god alone', or something like that.)
That's lovely put, David
Awareness is all, isn't it...... |
|
|
|
Jim and His Karma
2111 Posts |
Posted - Apr 09 2008 : 10:33:54 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Sparkle
How about:
"Lord I am fully worthy to receive you, infact I don't need to receive you at all because you already reside in every cell and every molecule of my being, allow me to wake up and experience this, thank you, thank me."
I don't want to wake up and experience this, because "I" is the problem. Grasping, flailing, recoiling, turf-staking "me" stirs up all the confusing turbulence in the first place.
The reed, battered by the wind, only suffers if it erroneously deems itself a separate thing...an "I". It makes no distinction between itself and the wind. The wind is not a separate thing happening to it, so it simply thinks it's dancing...that EVERYTHING is dancing. Nothing but dancing.
If the reed falls into the "me-in-here versus everything-out-there" delusion, and begins suffering egregiously from that friggin nonstop wind that's going all the time for crisesakes, the solution is not for this supposedly separate reed to gain spiritual insight into its situation. The reed does not need to experience anything, and it certainly doesn't need to "wake up". Quite the contrary, it needs to relax and let go into What Is. If only 'cuz What Is *IS*, anyway! Duh!
Educating or illuminating the reed makes no sense. What's the reed, anyway? Where does wind end and reed begin? There IS no reed, it's all God; poof, it's all just happening.
(And yes, the reed can do yoga to learn to relax and open up and let go. And no, none of this means we needn't take action or make choices...not dancing is still dancing, so we may as well play out our roles). |
Edited by - Jim and His Karma on Apr 09 2008 10:43:10 PM |
|
|
|
Anthem
1608 Posts |
Posted - Apr 09 2008 : 10:47:44 PM
|
quote:
I don't want to wake up and experience this, because "I" is the problem. Grasping, flailing, recoiling, turf-staking "me" stirs up all the confusing turbulence in the first place.
The reed, battered by the wind, only suffers if it erroneously deems itself a separate thing...an "I". It makes no distinction between itself and the wind. The wind is not a separate thing happening to it, so it simply thinks it's dancing...that EVERYTHING is dancing. Nothing but dancing.
If the reed falls into the "me-in-here versus everything-out-there" delusion, and begins suffering egregiously from that friggin nonstop wind that's going all the time for crisesakes, the solution is not for this supposedly separate reed to gain spiritual insight into its situation. The reed does not need to experience anything, and it certainly doesn't need to "wake up". Quite the contrary, it needs to relax and let go into What Is. If only 'cuz What Is *IS*, anyway! Duh!
Educating or illuminating the reed makes no sense. What's the reed, anyway? Where does wind end and reed begin? There IS no reed, it's all God; poof, it's all just happening.
Much truth there Jim, but until the reed stops believing in all the thoughts that created its sense of seperateness in the first place, by undoing them one by one until its essence is revealed, the reed's oneness with everything will remain an intellectual theory without a true knowing from being.
So we undo, until all that is left is what Is. How do we come to do nothing? No idea, but practices seem to help. |
|
|
|
Jim and His Karma
2111 Posts |
Posted - Apr 09 2008 : 10:51:50 PM
|
Nope. There's nothing to be gained for the reed to methodically divest itself of reedy thoughts. Even if it were possible, it would still intrinsically remain a reed, a separate thing, trying to accomplish something. A reed deeply at prayer, coming to reverent terms with that damned wind, is still a reed. Anything that happens to the reed, even really spiritual things, are still happening to a reed. **A reed cannot add "non-reedness" to its list of acquired concepts and accomplishments!**
You can't take "you" with you. The reed does not become or realize anything. There IS no reed for this stuff to happen to, and the notion that there is is what caused the confusion.
May as well just relax and fall backward into the soup. |
Edited by - Jim and His Karma on Apr 09 2008 10:56:50 PM |
|
|
|
Sparkle
Ireland
1457 Posts |
Posted - Apr 10 2008 : 05:00:35 AM
|
quote:
David said: Yes, but in a good sort of way. The idea here is that you cannot truly be worthy -- the healing makes the worthiness. I think that isn't a trap if you approach it right. The saints were generally very aware of being 'sinners', but it didn't bother them. As some of them see it, righteousness belongs to god alone. Jesus said something like that, forget the exact quote. ('Nothing is good except god alone', or something like that.)
I think I get what you're talking about David, are you saying:
We're not "good enough" until we're "good enough"?
So essentially the Church is telling us we are flawed, we are sinners, we have been born with original sin etc. and this of course is the "ego".
The position that Buddhist monk would take is that of No-self. Of the fact that you are me and I am you, that you are Jesus and Jesus is you.
I prefer this standpoint rather than the continuous reinforcement of the fact that we are separate and not worthy. This continuous reinforcement will only keep us there for longer - lets get the hell outta there
Thanks Katrinequote:
Great, Louis
I am still laughing.....
..."my beeing"...indeed
Jim, are you not talking about a one sided non-dual state only there. Do you want to simply disappear - poof??
|
|
|
|
Anthem
1608 Posts |
Posted - Apr 10 2008 : 09:45:50 AM
|
quote:
Nope. There's nothing to be gained for the reed to methodically divest itself of reedy thoughts.
The idea isn't for the reed to gain anything. However consciousness which has mistakenly identified itself as being a reed will know itself as consciousness and not the reed with practice. |
|
|
|
Jim and His Karma
2111 Posts |
Posted - Apr 10 2008 : 10:52:16 AM
|
For a me to be present, a distinction must be made. I don't need to disappear because I never existed. The reed never existed separate from the wind. There IS no reed, unless we think about it. That very thinking is "me" (see Descartes). The reed thought....and therefore it was. And once it was, dualism inexorably appeared. Friggin' wind...pummeling me day after day after day...
The only awakening possible is the awakening of the "I" thought...of me-in-here versus you-out-there. The reed can't "awaken" to its unity with wind ("Wind: I ACCEPT you!! You can proceed, for I've reached the lofty spiritual perch where I can pronounce us to be One!", which the wind, of course, blithely ignores). It can only "awaken" to its notion of separate reed-hood, and that's quite enough awakening! |
Edited by - Jim and His Karma on Apr 10 2008 12:42:15 PM |
|
|
|
Anthem
1608 Posts |
Posted - Apr 10 2008 : 1:16:05 PM
|
Hi Jim,
I agree with your entire post. We are coming to the same place if only from different ends, it is just another perspective of what Is.
My question is in regards to how you feel this "distinction" you write of here below is realized. We are saying the same thing from different perspectives.
quote:
Originally posted by Jim and His Karma
For a me to be present, a distinction must be made. I don't need to disappear because I never existed.
From my perspective, there is a sequence involved. For presence to know that its very "Beingness" is not thoughts (which bring about the idea that It is a reed) It must un-identify with them, then It(or That if you prefer) can say after the fact, as you write above, "I" never was. It can say "I never existed" before realization, but it will be just another thought (intellectual) and not from true knowing.
From my perspective, once already identified, consciousness can un-identify, so it no longer mistakenly believes it is thoughts, through doing or maybe more accurately "un-doing", aka practices of any kind, keeping in mind that some are more effective than others.
Is this starting to resemble the endless dual/ non-dual debate???
|
|
|
|
Balance
USA
967 Posts |
Posted - Apr 10 2008 : 1:32:17 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Jim and His Karma
For a me to be present, a distinction must be made. I don't need to disappear because I never existed. The reed never existed separate from the wind. There IS no reed, unless we think about it. That very thinking is "me" (see Descartes). The reed thought....and therefore it was. And once it was, dualism inexorably appeared. Friggin' wind...pummeling me day after day after day...
The only awakening possible is the awakening of the "I" thought...of me-in-here versus you-out-there. The reed can't "awaken" to its unity with wind ("Wind: I ACCEPT you!! You can proceed, for I've reached the lofty spiritual perch where I can pronounce us to be One!", which the wind, of course, blithely ignores). It can only "awaken" to its notion of separate reed-hood, and that's quite enough awakening!
Hi Jim. I'm thinking the "I" thought doesn't awaken. The "I" thought is an appearance in the awakening that always is. There is really no separate reed that awakens to a notion of being separate. The awakening is the one without a second and the reed and the wind are that.
But of course these notions and thoughts can go on and on without ending in anything but more thoughts, and we've been down that road. I'm sure we are on the same page here.
The keyboard will never have the final and satisfactory word, and the thoughts go on and on. |
Edited by - Balance on Apr 10 2008 3:56:12 PM |
|
|
|
Jim and His Karma
2111 Posts |
Posted - Apr 10 2008 : 1:51:58 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Anthem11
Is this starting to resemble the endless dual/ non-dual debate???
Yup. And as Yogani so eloquently explained in his new Self Inquiry book, this stuff is utterly useless when used to debate, persuade, or feed the mind. I resist drawing lots of distinctions and dealing with this as a philosophical "issue", because philosophical issues only feed the monster. Separate me eagerly gobbles up discussion of no-separate-me. It's like Bugs Bunny saying "A ride? Gosh, I'd LOVE to go for a ride!". The ego exuberantly prepares to take us on an ego-extinguishing trip (ooh, when do we get to the the super-powers part?!?)
The trick is to let, not to do. Don't embrace the wind. Let wind. "Let go and let wind" (aka "God"). And no, that doesn't mean going passive...we can "let the spirit move us". Of course, that's an awfully silly granting of permission, because that's been the case all along ANYWAY*. The only "problem" in this picture is from our lifelong tenacious resistance to it all. That damned pummeling wind "out there"....etc....
Thy will be done!
Insofar as any of this might offer someone out there a tiny bit of insight to vibrate on, that's a good thing. If it gives someone a little jolt, that's great! But as mind food to chew on? Ugh. No!
* - Our ego is like a toddler steering his toy steering wheel with great attention in the passenger seat as daddy drives. We feel disoriented, angry, and disappointed that the car keeps turning when we don't, and that our turns often have no effect. It's a nauseating disconnection. But there are enough random coincidences (I steer my toy wheel and the car really does go that way) to keep us hooked to the delusion for our entire bloody lives.
Let go of the chintzy little plastic toy steering wheel, already! |
Edited by - Jim and His Karma on Apr 10 2008 2:52:01 PM |
|
|
|
emc
2072 Posts |
Posted - Apr 10 2008 : 2:45:10 PM
|
| The I is the mind, whether it's the seemlingly separated mind or the One Universal Mind - Oneness - I AM. Still the mind. Beyond the mind, beingness IS. And beyond the being... nothing... |
|
|
|
Jim and His Karma
2111 Posts |
Posted - Apr 10 2008 : 2:53:41 PM
|
| But a "nothing" absolutely pulsing with loving potential. A fertile womb, rather than an empty neverland. |
|
|
|
emc
2072 Posts |
Posted - Apr 10 2008 : 3:53:47 PM
|
| Nope. Complete. As IS. No potentials. Complete. |
|
|
|
Jim and His Karma
2111 Posts |
Posted - Apr 10 2008 : 4:02:50 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by emc
Nope. Complete. As IS. No potentials. Complete.
Language issue. |
|
|
|
Kirtanman
USA
1651 Posts |
Posted - Apr 13 2008 : 5:09:35 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Jim and His Karma
Language issue.
And how!
It seems that if we could all just remember that the term LORD is the 17th century English translation of the Hebrew Jehovah, Ehyeh or Yahweh ...
... which is simply transliteration of the Hebrew YHVH ...
... meaning, Oh-So-Pertinently, as I imagine we can all joyously agree:
I AM.
... that a lot of this dialog (and wars, and strife, and atrocities, and guilt and grief and stuff ...) ... could be cleared right up!
"Pass it on."
Hm?
Oh, yes.
Really.
And God said unto Moses, I AM THAT I AM: and he said, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you. - Exodus 3:14, King James Version of the Bible.
Heart is Where the AUM* Is,
Kirtanman
*What's AUM in Hebrew?
YHVH
(Truly. Same exact Three-in-One-in-ALL symbolism as AUM.)
PS - Great thread, Louis. Thanks for starting it; and thanks to everyone who has commented. |
|
|
|
VIL
USA
586 Posts |
Posted - Apr 13 2008 : 5:19:54 PM
|
I AM (who, when, what, why, where, how, that) I AM
I AM, I AM
I AM
VIL |
|
|
|
Sparkle
Ireland
1457 Posts |
Posted - Apr 13 2008 : 6:27:49 PM
|
quote:
And how!
It seems that if we could all just remember that the term LORD is the 17th century English translation of the Hebrew Jehovah, Ehyeh or Yahweh ...
... which is simply transliteration of the Hebrew YHVH ...
... meaning, Oh-So-Pertinently, as I imagine we can all joyously agree:
I AM.
... that a lot of this dialog (and wars, and strife, and atrocities, and guilt and grief and stuff ...) ... could be cleared right up!
"Pass it on."
Thanks Kirtanman, I'll enjoy passing that on, should raise a few eyebrows
And thanks everyone for contributing, its been an interesting dialogue, although I think I got lost somewhere in the middle
Louis
|
|
|
| |
Topic |
|
|
|
| AYP Public Forum |
© Contributing Authors (opinions and advice belong to the respective authors) |
|
|
|
|
The Unworthyness Complex
