DISCLAIMER: Any time one tries to articulate or define that which is only captured and constrained
by words, there is bound to be a great degree of limitation, repetition, and vagueness. Hopefully, this
can be minimized, but also, this lesson can point out the larger meaning of this essay.
He was lying banged and battered, skewered
and bleeding
Talking crippled on the cross
Was his mind reeling and heaving hallucinating
Fleeing what a loss
The things he hadn’t touched or kissed his senses
Slowly stripped away
Not like Buddha not like Vishnu
Life wouldn’t rise through him again
I find it easy to believe
That he might question his beliefs
The beginning of the last temptation
Dime store mystery 1
There is all of this senseless, unhealthy, and
intrusive stuff (some physical, but most not)
between our world and us. Some of it is inherent
to civilization with its logic of dislocation and
disembodiment, some of it is socialized or
installed in us as methods of control, and some
of it we temporarily embrace in our attempt for
efficiency, comfort, or for coping within this
overwhelmingly dismal reality. This is, in
essence, alienation; the separation of us from
ourselves, from each other, and from life itself
(although these are not truly distinct categories
from each other). This is the complete opposite
of the direct unmediated experience that I
believe to be the fulfillment and celebration
of our unique individual spirits connecting. Spirituality,
for me, is a life-long process of ridding
myself of this mediation. It is not a concept or
idea, but the absence of abstraction and linear
perception. It is not a place, but an ongoing
unconscious linkage of liberatory moments within
a lived context. It is not a path, but a life (worth
living). It is not a practice, but simply being.
We are all encrusted with horrific scars and
are weighed down with clunky armor, but we
still have an essence or spirit that, for many of
us, is not yet broken or tamed. Connecting
more fully to this spirit is to more deeply
understand who I am, what I feel, and what
my authentic desires might be. To be spiritous
is to be refined or pure. Now, it seems odd to
speak in such absolute terms (especially from
where we are right now), but one could use this
simple definition as meaning to be unmediated,
unfractured, or whole – the essence of who
we are. While this may seem like an abstract
or ideal condition, the process of becoming
less mediated, could be an important step in a
spiritual reconnection to life. I feel that my
spirit flows through (and in fact is) the physical,
emotional, intellectual (and any other distinction
we could arbitrarily make) together within and
without me; there is no separation.
I would define a direct experience as an
immediate situation or way of being that does
not rely on the symbolic to understand and
define our experience, and one that is not
mediated by ideology, agenda, and personal
baggage (that is, what is imposed upon us
through various experiences and socializations).
It is understandable that in our current reality,
where the symbolic methods of understanding,
communicating, and navigating through the
world are almost all we have to operate with
(the rules of engagement), that we temporarily
consent to a certain degree of its control in
our lives (explaining complex situations,
communicating over long distance, making
plans, traffic lights, etc). But the one realm where
this is absolutely unnecessary, and in fact,
where it is ultimately inhibiting, is our spiritual
endeavors (and possibly sexual experience,
which can deeply relate to spirituality as well,
but that’s another essay). On a fundamental
level, how we view ourselves and how we are
connected within the context of our bodies, our
minds, our relationship to others, and the world,
inform how we move through the world and
relate to others, and are therefore relevant to
any anarchist discourse.
Mind and Body: Philosophical Traditions of Separation, Dualism, and Resolve
The duality of nature, godly nature,
Human nature splits the soul
Fully human, fully divine and divided
The great immortal soul
Split into pieces, whirling pieces, opposites
Attract
From the front, the side, the back
The mind itself attacks
I know the feeling, I know it from before
Descartes through Hegel belief is never sure
Dime store mystery, last temptation 2
The concept of the interconnectedness of everything
and within ourselves is in opposition to
most conventional philosophic traditions,
which attempt to compartmentalize, sever, and
dissect rather than see the confluence within.
The influential Western thinker who first
comes to mind, Rene Descartes, clearly
articulated what has always been the basis for
domestication throughout civilization, a strict
mind-body dualism. His Cartesian model of the
world rigorously cuts the connection between our
bodies and our mind, viewing our physicality as
merely complex machinery willed by God.
This is at the root of Western society, and in a
general way, civilization itself. Disconnected
from our bodies, Descartes believed in three
sources for our ideas: the adventitious (from
outside the mind), the factitious (manufactured
by the mind), and the innate (imprinted on the
mind by God). In his various Meditations, he
explored how we understand the world and
used “reason†to deduce his thoughts on
materiality and divinity, giving most credence
to the latter. Believing God to be perfection
and truth, he held that every mental act has
two distinct elements moved by God: understanding,
which observes and perceives; and
the will, which approves or agrees with the
belief in question. Since God gives both, he saw
them as virtually flawless, and that “error†or
“unreasonableness†is a moral failing or a
going against of truth. The idea of a mindbody
split, supports the idea that the mind is
created, and more or less controlled by God,
while the body independently performs an
assortment of repetitive and mundane physical
tasks. This concept follows through to the idea
of immortality of the human mind or “soulâ€,
unaffected by death of the physical organism.
This separation also sets the stage for scientists
to rely on observation for their mechanistic view
distinct from “divine†or “mystical†explanations.
Other Cartesian metaphysicians built on
Descartes’ ideas, describing varying degrees of
synchronization or paralleling concepts between
mind and body, but all accepting a fundamental
split, and all seeing us essentially as minds
linked to God, or at best, a mode or piece of the
wholeness of God, who coordinates our actions.
Cartesian philosophers have in common with
many spiritual thinkers the orientation of
moving beyond the physical, or transcending
the material to the spiritual. In hopes of escaping
the “dirtyâ€, “bloodyâ€, and “painful†aspects
of life, they create this distinction in order
to elevate above the “profane†and “foulnessâ€
to the “sacred†and “pureâ€. The somewhere or
somehow or someone that is elsewhere,
that we can “link to†(through prayer,
meditation, devotion, etc) relieves us
of the immediate
difficulties of our
physical reality. It
allows us to
tolerate
intolerable conditions and behaviors, as well
as rationalizing the acceptance of power over
us. Attempting to find significant or ultimate
meaning detached from the physical is at the
core of our dysfunctional society, yet being
open to, believing in, or feeling things that
conflict with our “knowledge†of physicality
can be a powerful non-rational perspective,
provided it is coupled with deep and integral
connection to the physical. While I feel the
need to place a higher value on what I can
see and touch, I also don’t want to be
purely a materialist. Rather than seeing the
spirit as something separate that we fasten
to, like a power plant, or something that
adjoins or travels through both body and
mind like electricity through a wire, spirit
could be understood as the essence of the
unseparated (unalienated) wholeness.
Another common philosophical thread is
that of exploring the tension between the
subjective and the objective. With Georg
Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel’s “absolute idealismâ€
(and idealists who followed), we see a critique
of traditional distinctions between objective
and subjective understanding and the development
of dialectical accounts of human
consciousness, including the individual
sensation through the social to that of a
World-Spirit. A tension is then seen between
intelligence and object, or the knower and the
known. Hegel believed in a fundamental unity
or absolute consciousness to connect all
subjective egos and a logic (dialectical in
character) to study its fundamental structure
of reality. Seeing Spirit as the grand synthesis
of the self-knowing and the self-actualizing
totality of all that is, Hegel saw human thought
as one portion of the Becoming of Absolute
Spirit. Considered subjectively, Spirit may be
observed through the structure of thought in
each individual, with consciousness striving
for perfect knowledge through a movement of
thesis through antithesis to synthesis. Considered
objectively, Spirit involves the interaction
among multiple selves. Most purely, Hegel
viewed the synthesis as the Absolute Spirit, a
historical process of expanding human awareness
of the fundamental unity of all reality,
gradually discovering and expressing its true
nature. This idealism, and its promise of inherent
or underlying unification, complete with
“logical†explanations, is progressive in nature,
and essentially leads to a dependence on religion,
nationalism, utilitarianism, and optimism.
Max Stirner took Hegel’s resolution of
dualisms further to create a triad of Materialist-
Idealist-Egoist, attempting to collapse idealism
and connecting philosophy to the individual
outside the fixed idea proposing a synthesis
found in the interest of the unique – the egoist.
While Friedrich Nietzsche set the goals
for the egoist as creation beyond oneself,
Stirner focused on consumption and the
temporary and finite ego’s appropriation
of the world as is, to make it one’s own.
Stirner pointed out that lords and gods obey
nothing beyond themselves and set themselves
up as the supreme morality to serve. Rather than
serving these “great egoistsâ€, Stirner proposed
to be the egoist himself (and ourselves), but rather
than imploring us to follow, entices us by example,
avoiding the creation of a new illusion to submit
to. Stirner’s egoism becomes merely the following
of one’s own interests and desires as a unique
being, and the investigation of what that might
be. There is no external moral or reference point
outside the values of the egoist. All relationships
then are willed and hold no intrinsic status or
permanent bonds, and are simply the union of
independent and conscious egoists. Perhaps most
important in Stirner’s realizations is the relation
to one’s self. He sets up mere “valuing†life
against “enjoyment†of life, in which the former
one is the object to be secured, and the latter one
is the subject of all valuing relations. In the
question of “who am I?†which has its response
in the person who asks it, Stirner speaks of a
“nothing†which is not one of emptiness, but
instead one without imposed or predetermined
value, a “creative nothing†to be filled with
spontaneous passions and relationships.
Stirner had a very positive influence in the
realm of philosophy, but still, somewhat limited
as an anthropocentric perspective, unless the
egoist could also be a bird, a river, a rock, or a
constellation. Ultimately, the intellectualization
of spirituality (philosophy) has severe limitations.
Releasing the Flow: Detouring from Paths, Rituals, Specialists, the Sacred, and Religion
I was sitting drumming thinking thumping
pondering
The mysteries of life
Outside the city shrieking screaming whispering
The mysteries of life 3
Some people see spirituality as a path to
travel, and the more worn the path, the more
“true†or “meaningful†it must be. This only
reveals fear and laziness. Fear, because
people distrust themselves, being stripped of
confidence, and are only partial beings dependent
on experts in a society fragmented and
stratified by specialization. Lazy, because
they are encouraged to take a path of least
resistance and “rewarded†for being uncritical
and uncreative, willing to accept a belief system
rather than dwell in the realm of experience
and mystery. They develop a practice, rather
than a spiritual life of being. Often, we mistake
the specifics of the process for the energy that
moves it, or that it is. Instead, the method is
infused with meaning rather than the experience
itself. For instance, we can understand and
experience a forest in many ways (scientifically,
historically, emotionally, etc), each revealing
a particular aspect but not its spirit (although,
within the symbolic, sometimes poetry and
music offer tingly glimpses). Typically, we
move through a forest on a path, one made
through ritualistic habit by humans or through
repetitious instinctual usage (by deer for
instance). We ordinarily stay on this path,
making slight excursions off it to encounter
“unique spaces†(epiphany or temptation).
This mode of encounter is typical of the
“spiritual path†model. We place a higher
value on what has come before (because
“they must know best†or “others have
done itâ€) than in our own spontaneous and
passionate desires.
I propose that a more direct, less
mediated, and more experiential way
to open up is to skeptically distinguish
the path as one limited route, and to
fully immerse oneself in the forest
(bushwhacking, climbing, swimming,
rolling, sleeping, eating, shitting,
breathing, singing, remembering, etc).
In the first method (the path), we
actually go around the forest. It is on
either side of us, rather than into the
forest, and the forest into us. We are
alienated from it through the method,
rather than part of it through experience.
Again, this hints at the object-subject
dualism that creates problematic
relationships and barely partial
comprehension. Mediation is a path
around rather than immersion into.
Ritual, including ceremony, prayer,
chanting, sacrifice, etc, is the typical
form of mediated spirituality or “spiritual
expression†(a phrase which should hint at its
alienated attributes). It funnels our experience
and motivations into premeditated and rehearsed
ceremonial conformity. When we define our
spirituality by others’ previous accounts or
standards, we submit and define our spirit to
their limitations. Ritual has all but replaced
spiritual being and is the manifestation of a
spiritually impoverished and fractured society.
We ritualize every aspect of our lives, replacing
authentic moments with predetermined ones.
Like neurotic obsessive-compulsive drones, we
go through the motions (Rosary Beads, Buddhist
chants, Pagan dances, etc) thinking this is
connection and substance. Even if we knew the
supposed “purpose†of these rituals, which we
often do not, their meanings are specific to very
particular places, people, and times. Even these
“original†meanings were mediated expressions
or alienated procedures, so their postmodern
imitations are surely doubly dubious. New Age,
the salad bar of spirituality, sifts through the
many spiritual manifestations and religions in
an attempt to glean “positive†aspects from each
and re-contextualize them into one’s particular
world-view, typically filling spiritual emptiness
with the de-spiritualized motions and rituals
of others. It is the spiritual cop-out for the
lethargic and uncreative and for those who view
everything as a commodity to consume, or who
eternally search for the miracle cure or magic
pill (or those who purchase metaphysical
lottery tickets). New Age is not a specific path
(although there are some common trajectories
used), but instead, a postmodern excuse for
tiresome superficiality. New Agers will pull out
the “appropriate†ritual for any situation or the
“suitable†prayer for each moment, and yet reek
of eternal emptiness, buzzing from one path to
the next more often than many of us change
our socks.
Another unsettling aspect of traditional
and conventional spirituality is that of the
specialist (shaman, master, guru, priest, etc).
While making it more convenient to approach
a certain spiritual paradigm, these experts
actually move us further from our direct
experience into that of ceremony and religion.
If spirituality were merely a technical matter,
it would almost seem reasonable to approach
an expert for advice, guidance, or even direction,
temporarily forgetting the issues of power and
lack of subjectivity that surround them. Shamans,
for instance, throughout the history of external
spiritual expression and ritualized practice,
have monopolized the link to the “otherâ€.
While there has also been the role of shaman
as healer and visionary (which also contain
problematic aspects of hyper-specialization),
typically they are at the root of a stratified
society based on division of labor and of
specialized knowledge and power. This limits
the individual’s access to a spiritual life, and
again, funnels it through a vessel with one
finite and ritualized perspective. As a society
increases in scale, power becomes multiplied,
and a class of priests collaborates and creates
a body of “knowledge†and customs as a
mystified society within a society. While the
dynamics of gurus, masters, priests, and
other specialists have varying levels of
power depending on the situation, they all
share the intrinsic element of mediator.
The concept of “the sacred†is another
questionable notion often linked to a quest for
spirituality. This encompasses themes in which
certain domains are viewed as sacred, everything
is sacred, or nothing is sacred, each with its
own specific rationale, reactive position, and
custom. The human/divine split is encompassed
within the idea that certain things, beings,
actions, or realms are exclusively sacred, in
which we, as humans, inhabit a corrupt and
profane world, and that the sacred is “untouchableâ€
by the mortal and “lesser†being, except
through mediated and specialized customs and
people. This is the basis for a complete separation.
The concept of everything being sacred,
views all of this world, and beyond, as divine
and proposes specific morally grounded
methods and practices for interaction with our
world. The concept of nothing being sacred
(while of most interest to me as an independent
unique being relating to my world) is often,
unfortunately, a rationale for self-indulgent
destruction of the world and the whimsical
oppression of everything outside ourselves.
Probably the most helpful way to approach
the concept of profanity/sacredness, is to avoid
the abstraction altogether and develop unique
relationships outside this false dichotomy.
Paths, rituals, specialists, and concepts of the
sacred are all vital components of the institutionalization
of spirituality – religion. Obviously,
the discussion of this particular subject is a
long one, and best left for anarchist ABC’s,
but it does represent the fulfillment and summation
of all of the negative and alienated
projects of spirituality, and in fact, stands on the
opposite extreme to an unmediated spirituality.
The perpetuation of ideological, moral, or
religious confinements are, in essence, a profound
form of mediation from a free, willed,
direct experience absent of imposed bonds and
limitations. Another significant problem with
any religious-centered view (beyond the
personally limiting and inadequate nature of
it) is that it creates, like any form of ideology,
an abstract bias, self-righteous attitude, and the
conception of an “otherâ€. Once traveled down,
this slope gets slipperier as morality and
dogmatism become all-consuming. Religion is
the endpoint, and complete deadness of spirit.
Neither Here Nor There: Living Outside of the Mediated Framework
There’s a funeral tomorrow
At St. Patrick’s the bells will ring for you
Ah, what must you have been thinking
When you realized the time had come for you
I wish I hadn’t thrown away my time
On so much human and so much less divine
The end of the last temptation
The end of a dime store mystery4
Spirituality, for me, is the ability to directly
connect without defining or creating a solidified
framework or even desiring to express the
experience. By its very nature it is unexplainable.
Anytime we try to express these experiences,
by the very character of representation, they
cannot be direct experiences; they are outside
us and move further from us as an abstract
medium that is only a pale reflection. Anytime
we limit our experiences through ritual, paths,
specialists, ideology, religion, morality etc, we
mediate our lives through an imposed and
artificial condition that is
inherently repressive and
stifling to our spirit. The
experience of expanding
ourselves, opening ourselves,
and understanding ourselves
in a free and unlimited way
is where I derive significance
of being. Spirituality
can be burning a church, the
Grand Canyon at sundown,
a snowflake on your
tongue, a flash of deja vu,
a tingle up your spine, an
unrestrained orgasm, sharing
deep intimacy…really
anytime we are fully present
in ourselves and in the world
without barriers. How we relate or connect to our
spirit or our unmediated being is always different
from person to person, and even within ourselves;
in other words, always in a perpetual state of flux.
We are all part of the earth. All detachment,
elevation, or transcendence is an illusion. All we
can do is move closer or further from life and
ourselves. This should not be mistaken, however,
for a “return to Eden†undertaking. Sure, in my
opinion, life for humans (and all other beings)
was qualitatively richer and healthier before
civilization’s annihilation of connectivity, but
“return†is merely a reversal of the linearity of
progressivism. Just as wildness is not something
to preserve or restore, but something inside
us to connect to and present in all of our relationships.
Living free
now and ultimately
being released
in a complete
physical sense
as our flesh
becomes the nourishment
for future
life is all we can “knowâ€.
“We’re all gonna be just dirt
in the ground†(meditate on that for
a while). Our ego is for now, the
moment, and is the basis for infinite
possibilities of connection. Our ideas
and thoughts are the expression
of our ego, the now, and helps us to
momentarily distinguish ourselves from everything
else of which we are intricately a part.
There is no way out (this is not merely an
objective analysis, but also a subjective
celebration)…we are connected! We are influenced
and we influence. Under all our mediation,
we are spirit.
|