[I have recently engaged in email correspondence
with a Trappist monk. The dialogue began with my response to his sharing an
insight about the difference between “resurrection” and “transfiguration”.
Resurrection involves a process whereby a physical body that has died comes
back to physical life. Transfiguration involves a process whereby a physical
body totally transforms into a form on a higher level of energy frequency that
is no longer physical as we know it. Transfigured beings have the ability to
“materialize” in the physical world and interact on the physical level,
although they ultimately are not subject to physical laws, as this appearance
is only a “materialization”, and they remain beyond the laws of physicality as
we know them. His insight was contrary to the general Christian view that after
Jesus’ physical death, his corpse went through a physical resurrection and
after that physical resurrection, it went through a transfiguration. His
insight was that there was no physical resurrection, but rather that the corpse
transfigured without the intermediate step of a physical resurrection, that
what witnesses described as a physical resurrection was rather a
materialization of the already transfigured body. He therefore concluded that
the holiday of Easter should not focus on resurrection, but rather on
transfiguration and materialization. Following are revised excerpts from my
dialogue with him that I would like to share on this blog].
I bring to this discussion
the perspective of a Jewish yogi. I won’t bother you with the details of my
background, but rather refer you to my website for more information along those
lines if you are interested. I am, however, attaching a file, “Nice Jewish Boy
Meets Rabbi Jesus” [available on this
blog in the “Articles” section]
Your presentation evokes
many thoughts on the subject. One strain of traditional Jewish thought is that
upon the coming of Messiah, all of the dead corpses existing (or at least the
Jewish corpses) will literally become regenerated and reanimated, to live out
their lives again in the Messianic Age. This is more akin to the Lazarus
process of a dead corpse being brought back to life, than a transfiguration as
you describe. But then there is the Talmudic take on Enoch (which I imagine you
are familiar with, but let me know if you are not). It is said that Enoch did
not die a normal physical death, but rather literally bodily ascended to
heaven, similar to the traditional story of Jesus’ ascension and Mother Mary’s
Assumption. I always questioned these versions, as you have, due to what you
call the “old spatial cosmology”. After all, when we are talking about heaven,
we are talking about a different dimension than common earthly existence. How
could an earthly physical body move into a dimension that is not earthly
without somehow substantially transforming? I agree that the examples of Enoch
and Jesus were illustrations of a total transformation of the physical body to
something not physical at all, what you call “transfiguration”.
In the yoga traditions of
India, these concepts are generally accepted, although the terminology is
different. One strain of yoga refers to spiritual development ultimately
leading to the transformation of the earthly physical body into a “Divine
Body”. As far as I can tell, this is the same process as what you call
“transfiguration”. Strains of yoga also refer to beings that exist in
dimensions beyond our physical world who nevertheless can appear to materialize
in this dimension for the sake of guiding us mere mortals, as you describe
about Jesus.
There are also strains of
yoga that maintain that the soul of a true master can leave a physical body and
come back to it, or come back to another physical body, reanimating a newly
deceased body.
So these are all
variations on resurrection and transfiguration as found in the yoga tradition
of India.
I also wonder about a
possible conception that Jesus was an incarnation from the start, that he chose
to incarnate or “materialize” as the infant Jesus. From this perspective, what
you call a transfiguration upon his death was just a “dematerialization” after
his work was done, at least for the time being, in an apparent physical
materialized body. The physical death of a mortal body was just an “apparent”
physical death from this perspective, as he basically was immortal all along.
Just some more food for thought.
As for me personally, I’m
not even attempting to strive for a Divine Body. I’m merely working on being
able to consciously exit the body at the time of death. If I’m drawn back to
earthly existence another time, I’ll have another opportunity to keep on
developing spiritually (I believe in reincarnation, so that is my perspective).
I may be drawn back involuntarily, due to lingering karma, or voluntarily,
impelled by an urge to serve, similar to the Bodhisattva concept in Buddhism. So
I am hopeful of reaching a level of spiritual development where I am able to
consciously exit and consciously enter again, whether to this dimension or some
other, as I am so called or moved to do.
Well, that’s it for me
now. I welcome your thoughts.
* * *
It is the weekend, so it
is a good time for me to continue with this dialogue. I am so happy you
mentioned Ramana Maharshi, as I have had an affinity for him for many years.
When I went to India a few years ago, I made a point to visit his ashram, where
I stayed for several days. It was one of the highlights of my trip. I am in
close affinity with his teachings of Advaita Vedanta, and I basically consider
myself a Vedantist. I will provide you with my perspective on the general gist
of things you have said, which perspective I believe is in keeping with the
teachings of Advaita Vedanta.
From the perspective of
Advaita Vedanta, your use of the word “permanent” is a little too loose,
because there is only one True Reality that is permanent, and that is what is
called Brahman, Non-dual Reality without a second. This concept is consistent
with the Buddhist concept of Shunyata, and the Kabalist concept of Ein/Ein Soph
(Ein = Nothingness, Ein Soph = the paradoxical state of
nothingness/everythingness, world without end). Although the Buddhists speak of
The Void or Emptiness, they have clarified that these terms are really
referring to the same type of non-dual reality referred to by the Vedantists.
It is the dimension of the impersonal, the unmanifest, the absolute, of pure
potentiality that is the underlying substratum and origination of all that
exists in the dimension of the personal, the manifest, the relative, the actual,
what Paul Tillich has referred to as the “Ground” of existence. So “emptiness”
is actually brim full of potentiality, but because it is in a state of
unmanifest potentiality, it is called “emptiness”. This is the perspective of
what is also called “monism”, that there is no real distinction between God and
God’s creation, just as there is no real distinction between the ocean and its
waves. Traditional monotheists usually make a distinction between God and God’s
creation, between the waves and the ocean. But where exactly does the wave
begin as distinct from the ocean? However, even from the monotheist point of
view, God is all that is permanent, while everything in God’s creation is
impermanent. There can be nothing that is permanent that is separate from God
in any fashion.
So I guess I have some
issue with you saying that Jesus and Mary “permanently” transfigured. From my
perspective, nothing that can be identified as separate and distinct in any
fashion is permanent. They may have risen to a higher dimension never to return
to the earthly dimension in the manner in which they previously existed. So in
that sense, I guess you can say they “permanently” transfigured, but that does
not mean that their new state in which you can still distinguish Jesus from
Mary in any way is permanent.
The monistic definition of
God that I have come up with, encompassing the totality of creation and beyond
is, “God is everything that exists, both known and unknown, and all activity
and inactivity related to everything that exists”. The “inactivity” refers to
what lies beyond creation in the non-dual Reality. So with this definition in
mind, certainly everyone and everything at every level of perceived existence
is already and has always been a part of the body of God, and totally dependent
on God for its perceived existence, just as waves are totally dependent upon
the ocean for their existence. The ocean can exist without waves, but waves
cannot exist without the ocean, because their entire substance is the substance
of the ocean. No ocean, no waves. No God, no us. So it all starts to become
problematic from this perspective when we start talking about resurrection and
transfiguration and the distinction between the two terms. Those distinctions
only have any meaning in our grappling with semantic exercises in the state of
the impermanent relative. If everything already is God or a part of the body of
God, then what is being resurrected, what is being transfigured? Waves come,
waves go, but it is all within the context of their always being a part of the
ocean.
So getting back to the
world of seeming separation and impermanence, we make all of these
distinctions. Yes, it is possible for those rare beings that have what we call
a physical, mortal body of flesh and bones to spiritually transform their
bodies while still alive (or, perhaps more accurately, to have their bodies
transformed by an act of Grace) into “divine” or “spiritual” bodies that are no
longer of the substance of mortal physical bodies. But that alone does not mean
that they cease all sense of separative existence, but rather that their
perceived separative existence has attained a higher level of functioning in a
dimension beyond physicality but still with some separative identity. The ocean
manifests many waves in many different dimensions in addition to what we call
the physical dimension. And yes, it is possible for other beings that their
mortal physical bodies will die and decay, but their souls will leave those
bodies upon death and enter into another dimension. How different is their
other-worldly existence from those whose bodies were transformed before they
died is problematic.
From the yoga point of
view, those souls who have unfinished business on the earthly plane will
reincarnate. Perhaps others that have unfinished business will enter a
separative existence in another, non-earthly dimension. There is no end to the
dimensions of existence in the phenomenal cosmos besides earthly existence. It
is hard for me to accept the notion that you seem to express, like many
monotheists, that upon physical earthly death, no souls ever return to earth,
but rather either earn the merit of enjoying a continued separative existence
in some pleasant celestial realm, or the demerit of suffering in some horrible
lower realm for all of eternity without any continuing evolution and opportunity
for further spiritual development in those other dimensions. For me, the
universe is all about constant, ongoing evolution on every conceivable and
inconceivable level, until it all dissolves back into total nothingness.
My personal belief is that
beings like Jesus Christ, Ramana Maharshi and others continue to exist in other-worldly
dimensions that can access our worldly dimension to continue to provide
guidance and inspiration to us. (Of course, Ramana Maharshi died a physical
death, and his body was buried, and nobody claims that his body was resurrected
or transfigured, but rather that it remains buried. However, his followers do
claim that his soul was totally liberated upon his death, so that it no longer
had to return to an earthly existence. Actually, many would claim that his soul
entered his body already totally liberated, and that he lived a bodily
existence and played out the drama of his early life of spiritual struggle and
searching by pure Grace just for the sake of providing guidance and inspiration
for others on the physical plane. Others go even further and claim that he was
an Avatar, an incarnation of Shiva, one expression of the unlimited God
appearing in apparent physical earthly form for the sake of mankind). So when
people report visions of such beings, they are not mere imaginings, but true
visitations and revelations of these beings dedicated to continuing to provide
guidance. Or put in another way, it is possible for beings in our worldly
existence who have spiritual sensitivities to access the dimension of these
beings in order to be provided guidance and inspiration. It can also work the
other way, that the beings from another dimension can “tone down their
frequency” and appear in our earthly dimension to those here with spiritual
sensitivity.
As far as the end-time
goes, I am not a believer in the various happily-ever-after scenarios as is
commonly presented by Jewish, Christian and Muslim theologies. The
Vedantic/Hindu conception of ages and cycles of creation and dissolution makes
more “sense” to me. Instead of one “big bang”, I call it the “bang-bang”
theory. Creation followed by dissolution, over and over again. I believe that
major shifts do occur, and that is what the end-time notions are misinterpreting,
major shifts individually and collectively. But not any be-all-and-end-all
scenario. From the kabalistic conception, which to me is consistent with the
Vedic conception, the process of creation involves eternity and infinity
contracting in their respective dimensions to allow for time and space and
creation as we know it, flowing out of a “big bang” that is impelled out of
that contraction. Consistent with this description, our scientists tell us that
this universe as we know it is expanding from this “big bang” that they have
posited. My sense is that it will continue to expand back to the pre-creation
phase of eternity and infinity on all dimensions, allowing for nothing else at
all to exist except eternity and infinity (perhaps this is the same as a cosmos
composed solely of black holes and dark matter). And then there will be another
dimensional contraction to allow for another round of creation. I believe that
the scientific model also provides for the expansion to eventually stop and be
followed by a contraction. So when there is the end of time, there will also be
the end of space, and there will be nobody around in any separative sense of
any separative existence to be left to experience anything. Not necessarily
something to look forward to, unless you just want to exit out of this worldly
existence at all costs.
However, on an individual
level, timelessness and spacelessness, eternity and infinity, continue to
paradoxically exist in another dimension while we simultaneously have a sense
of mundane separate existence in the dimensions of time and space. Spiritual
exercises, such as meditation, provide us a process whereby we can temporarily
access eternity and infinity through connecting with the Fifth Dimension of
pure consciousness, beyond time and space. You could say that those who
spiritually advance to another dimension have even more easy and ready access
to eternity and infinity, to pure consciousness, but nothing separate can exist
in pure, unadulterated eternity and infinity. That is why at some places, the
Torah states that nobody can see the face of God and live/exist, because it is
only possible to encounter the face of God at that level through abandonment of
any sense of separation. This is what Kabala refers to as bittul or yichud,
merging, union with the Absolute, what yoga calls nirvikalpa samadhi. However,
at other places, the Torah paradoxically refers to Moses as having seen God
face-to-face. This is an encounter with God at the highest level possible while
still retaining a state of separative self, what Kabala refers to as devekut,
clinging, cleaving to God, what yoga calls savikalpa samadhi. Yoga even posits
that highly advanced spiritual beings can remain connected with infinity and
eternity while still appearing and functioning to us in the physical world with
what is termed a “vestigial” body. These beings have no sense of egoic
separation at all, yet paradoxically appear to function as though they are
aware of distinctions. As one such master put it, “I do not feel full or
fulfilled. I am lost in the Fullness.”
To be honest with you, it
does not matter much to me how we define, distinguish and conceptualize all of
these processes. There are all kinds of levels of concentrations and
magnifications of divinity, but then again, what is not God if God is Omniscient,
Omnipresent and Omnipotent?
I leave you for now with
this:
I am Hashem and there is
no other: other than Me there is no God; I will gird you, though you did not
know Me, in order that those from east and west would know that there is
nothing besides Me; I am Hashem, and there is no other. [I am the One] Who
forms light and creates darkness; Who makes peace and creates evil; I am
Hashem, Maker of all these.
Isaiah 45:5 – 45:7 (Stone Artscroll
Tanach translation)
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment