On my quest to figure out the philosophy behind mindfulness, something that I came to be interested in through a neuroscience/psychiatry angle, I came across an intriguing presence here among the philosophically inclined bloggers: Nguyên Giác. It is my pleasure to share his views on some difficult questions that have been on my mind. As this topic concerns religion, some readers may get sensitive. Please remember Aristotle: “It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it.” Enter Steven.. (I try to stay silent for most of it, but alas…)
Who am I?
I’m Steven J Barker Jr., or Nguyên Giác. I share my insights at gnotruth.com. I’m always reluctant to put forward any view, but for the sake of the people like me who benefit from the formless teachings, I type words and share them on the internet. For the sake of people like me, who have been burned by modern Christian dogma, I share alternative early Christian views. For the sake of the little ones arising in this Saha Realm, I gently shine my light so that others may see.
Not forcing any particular view, but smashing all views with Nietzsche’s hammer – I am that kind of philosopher. The anti-philosopher.
A journey through religion towards mindfulness
I was introduced to Thich Nhat Hanh’s writing when I was 12. My mom saw that I was struggling with big questions. She bought me a book: “Living Buddha, Living Christ”. I had already become quite absorbed in Christian thinking, but it was starting to bring huge conflict as my intellect was developing and Christian theology makes n0 sense. It is anti-intellectual.
Thich Nhat Hanh introduced me to a new way of thinking about the teaching of Jesus. He helped me to understand my own spiritual tradition. Understanding my own spiritual tradition, I also began to understand the words of Buddha. As a child, I began to incorporate mindfulness into my daily life.
I began to understand that mundane daily life is the chess board – it’s the actual playing field – the meditation cushion is nice, but, eventually, we have to actually stand up and face the real world.
I am Buddhist. I am engaged in the practice of continual mindfulness. In Christian terms, this practice can be called ‘walking in the Kingdom as a Child’. Before I start rambling, I want to share this beautiful description of Mindfulness by Sadasiva Saccidananda (my Dhamma friend and internet ally):
Simple practice of mindfulness, awareness of anything external or internal passing before your mind-camera, culminates in awareness of awareness itself. Naturally you shall rest in the common factor of all observations: awareness itself and seeing all as awareness, as mind in mind.
Seeing all things as equal data, even your “ego” as another observable actor among others, leads to equality & equanimity.
A mindful Jesus and a non-religious Buddha
A Buddhist is one who works toward Buddho. Buddho is unfiltered, explosive and serene awareness. Awakeness. Enlightenment. A Buddhist is one who practices mindfulness. Thich Nhat Hanh likes to equate mindfulness with the Holy Spirit.
In another of my spiritual traditions. the teachings of Yeshua, or “Christianity”, this energy or experience is called Gnosis. Perfect Gnosis is Buddho. This might sound far flung, wild and/or weird, but the path to PrajnaParamita (perfection of wisdom) is as simple as following one’s own breath.
Gospel of Thomas, 3:
If your leaders tell you, “Look, the kingdom is in heaven,”
then the birds of heaven will precede you.
If they say to you, “It’s in the sea,”
then the fish will precede you.
But the kingdom is inside you and it is outside you.
When you know yourselves, then you will be known,
and you will understand that you are children of the living One.
But if you do not know yourselves,
then you dwell in poverty and you are poverty.
The above quote, from a text which is as “authentic” as any in the New Testament, has Jesus telling us to ignore televangelists with their promises of heaven.
Instead, we find him encouraging us to practice mindfulness. The simple process of Gnoing ourselves is healing: this is mindfulness.
And, this rebellious Jesus, where did he come from!? Well, obviously, the early Church wouldn’t have survived into the present if it had openly rebuked its own leaders and encouraged people on their own spiritual journey instead of conforming to its dogma. The Gospel of Thomas’ position was thoroughly attacked by the author of the Gospel of John (check out the work of Elaine Pagels). Sadly, today’s Church is founded on the belief that Jesus is totally unique – the only son of God – this is John’s position.
John abhorred Thomas’ message that we are all children and the kingdom is already here.
Gospel of Thomas, 108:
Whoever drinks from my mouth will become like me.
I myself shall become that person,
and the hidden things will be revealed to that one.
As you can tell, I’m not very stoked on John’s message. And, I am very stoked on Thomas’ (Thomas means “twin”). I understand the message.
I could try to outline the process; I could try to describe the mind’s journey from ignorance and suffering to awareness, understanding and love – but this has already been done before me. There are many, many maps already – the problem is not that there aren’t enough maps, the problem is that the territory is real, alive, and changing. Old maps quickly become useless.
The ancient “map-makers” of the territory of the mind are not at fault for our foolish clinging to dead doctrine. The fault is ours.
With our fear, greed, laziness, addiction and delusion we have developed all sorts of wrong views that propagate through the mind system and create the painful errors of war, famine, disease, etc.
Gospel of Thomas, 52:
His [Yeshua’s] students said to him,
Twenty-four prophets have spoken in Israel
and they all spoke of you.
He said to them,
You have disregarded the living one among you
and have spoken of the dead.
There must be a way forward that honors the past, but also releases its grip upon our minds. We would all do well to learn to ‘philosophise with hammers’.
History of religion: a case of oversimplifying the (very) complex
History is a nice and tidy story.
History is, necessarily, always an oversimplification.
We don’t have the capacity to know this present moment in totality, so how can we hope to know the twists and turns of ephemeral ideas through rough and bloody history? I’m not saying we shouldn’t strive for historical accuracy. I’m saying we should always be skeptical of this or that narrative.
The Christian church’s “history” has been revealed to be a fabrication.
The idea that Early Christianity was one cohesive movement has been thoroughly discredited and replaced with the understanding that it was a very diverse movement with many ideas about who Jesus was and why he was important.
The same must be true about Buddhism. The West has a nice story about it’s development, but that story is just a nice summary that is most likely missing some huge pieces. I read a passage from the Encyclopedia of Religion (article by Frank Reynolds and Charles Hallisey) the other day. It boggled my mind for a bit:
“The concept of Buddhism was created about three centuries ago to identify what we now know to be a pan-Asian religious tradition that dates back some twenty-five hundred years. Although the concept, rather recent and European in origin, had gradually, if sometimes begrudgingly, received global acceptance, there is still no consensus about its definition.”
“Buddhism” is, in many ways, a European idea! Interacting with the actual cultures that practice Buddhism, you quickly find that their practice is not what you expected- it is not what you read about. Sure, there are lots of familiar things that we Europeans have accurately portrayed, but the pulsing reality of Buddhism in practice is always different from any explanation of it. It is the practice that goes beyond, beyond all thought, beyond all concepts – this practice simply cannot be made into a system. All such systems are merely hindrances.
In short, Buddhism’s history is complex and frequently oversimplified.
In the West, we have this idea of a singular Buddhism that puts forth one coherent message. However, in truth, there are many Buddhist schools and traditions with various stances on all sorts of weird issues.
This is why I have to stand back and redefine my Buddhism. I chase Buddho. I chase Gnosis. Wherever it arises, with whatever name, wearing whatever clothing – I chase Buddha. The big Buddha. The ineffable Buddha.
At the same time, I don’t want to disrespect the religious traditions that have nurtured my growth. I’ve benefited from the support of a Vietnamese Buddhist community. Taking the five precepts, becoming an “official lay Buddhist”, I received the name “Nguyên Giác”. It means something like, “awakened source” or “source of awakening”. If you like labels, you could say that I practice a mixture of Zen, Pureland and Yeshua Buddhism.
I was not raised in a “religious household”, but for whatever reason, even in my earliest memories, “religious” issues have always been extremely important to me. I did attend a Lutheran Church when I was young. I’ve read the Bible many times over and have dug through all sorts of academic papers that analyse the larger cultural context of early Christianity. I’ve spent a lot of time comparing and contrasting the texts that arose over the course of Christianity’s evolution. It has been fun and challenging. As a child of the West, the figure of Jesus has played a huge role in my development. Jesus has been with me – as both irritant and as comforter.
Gospel of Thomas:
Seek and do not stop seeking until you find.
When you find, you will be troubled.
When you are troubled,
you will marvel and rule over all.
Marvelling is a wonderful practice. I think marvelling could be classified as a type of mindfulness meditation.
There have been experiences that have revealed ‘deep’ things that are difficult to put into words. Putting words to these types of experiences, if not done with extreme care, can be harmful to oneself and to those who hear. So, instead of pointing at the goal of supreme Gnosis, I try to point at the path of mindfulness. It is something everyone can see and touch. The biggest truths cannot be conveyed with words: mind-to-mind is the only way. Set on the path of marvelling, an individual will find their own way by following beacons of joy.
17 thoughts on “Why Christians practicing mindfulness should learn about the Gospel of Thomas”
It’s amazing that the Gospel of Thomas survived the many edits that necessarily take place in a tome so old and open to interpretation. Martina, I agree with Aristotle – one must keep an open mind. If a person’s faith is so easily shattered, maybe it’s time to explore beyond the paradigm. Personally in such matters, I’ve always asked Creation. And have long received quite satisfactory answers, mostly boiling down to the fact that there are many roads to the mountain. And in the end, there will certainly be more we never even dreamed possible. Aloha.
The Gospel of Thomas didn’t receive as many edits as the New Testament gospels because it wasn’t included in the official cannon. It has been hidden in the sands of Egypt for looooong time. A nicely preserved little chunk of history. But yeah, even in that early time texts were circulating and probably experience transformation at the hand of unskilled translators. But… not nearly as many edits could have been made to Thomas.. it was gone.
The GOT wasn’t included in New Testament because the Church Fathers sided with the author of the Gospel of John. The Gospel of John seems to have been written in response to Thomas.
There were fragments of the Gospel of Thomas found, i think in the 1800’s, and although they were just fragments people were really excited to see some diversity in early Christianity. The church has put forth the idea that there was unity in the beginning and that this cohesive Orthodox (right thinking) church was challenged by so called “heretics”. In fact, these “heretics” were just people from other early christian groups, with different interpretations of who Jesus was and why he was important. When the Nag Hammadi Collection was discovered it blew everyone away. There was SOOOO much more diversity than anyone had imagined.
If you haven’t already checked it out, you should take a look at Bart Ehrman’s, Misquoting Jesus. I was reminded of that book when you mentioned edits. The documents of the New Testament have been totally hacked
LikeLiked by 2 people
Yes, agreed on hijacked. I was a longtime radio interviewer. There’s a little known and fantastic book written by William Fix called Lake of Memory Rising. I highly recommend it. Good scholarly research. Aloha.
LikeLiked by 2 people
You’re great for obscure book treasures – as always!
LikeLiked by 1 person
All religions are more complicated than as they are presented. This is because, being made by man, they can be amended, morphed, changed, redacted, edited. by man and so they were and are (it is still occurring, see “prosperity ministries”). The early history of Christianity shows literal wars between factions who had different ideas of what Christianity was and could become. This why I find searching through scripture to find support for one’s ideas is a bogus approach. The best thing you can find is that someone else had the same idea before you did. The idea isn’t any more valuable, any more true, any more anything. All you have found out is that you are not alone.
You could have just asked me. I would have told you: “You are not alone.”
LikeLiked by 1 person
You know, I really don’t think that there any ideas that are actually unique. John the Caveman has thought of most of this stuff we’re still preoccupied with. At the same time, we’re highly contextual in our understanding. For example, I help people with their writing for a particular exam. Unless I am talking about a past question, or how many marks you will get – they don’t really listen. You could recite Strunk and White, but they will only understand it if it is explained in their own context.
In Ireland, until the 50s, mass used to be in Latin. Can you believe that? Some of the views of the current Pope are v culturally contextual. One of the psychiatrists I worked with used to ask: “How do you know if they’re suffering psychosis, or if the CIA is really after them?” Answer: “It’s all in the context.” Clever man?
Hey, Steve. Great name! Thanks for sharing your thoughts about this.
I’ve got a couple comments on your comment 🙂
“This why I find searching through scripture to find support for one’s ideas is a bogus approach.”
I don’t mean to imply that scriptures need to support ideas. I’m thinking about allllllll those people that *do* believe scripture *must* support ideas. All ideas. Tons of American Christians actually believe that everything in the Bible is unquestionably true. They think that the earth is 6,000 years old and that dinosaur fossils are the devil’s trick meant to make us deviate from unwavering faith in scripture. They don’t seem to understand that the Bible is a collection of human writings– seems they imagine God got out her pen and just started going at it.
So, because they care so much about scripture, giving them the Gospel of Thomas may help them to bridge gaps between Christian and Buddhist thought and practice. Bridging this gap could help them to practice mindfulness comfortably, as Christians, recognizing that even Jesus advocated for the knowing of oneself. Much of western mindfulness meditation is being appropriated from Buddhist traditions– bringing focus to the Gospel of Thomas could be beneficial for many Christians that are reluctant to engage in any kind of meditation, thinking it is unchristian.
“All religions are more complicated than as they are presented.”
Yep. All religions and all things are more than they seem. History is a convenient story. Even the present moment is much more complicated than is presented by our limited sense perceptions. If only we could see microwaves! Or, it would be sweet if we could do some echolocation!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Reblogged this on GnoTruth and commented:
Interview with Dr. Martina Feyzrakhmanova.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Fascinating. I think (and feel) that the narratives we use to communicate ideas, values are so often co-opted by the individual or collective ego (this latter may also be culture, language, mythology). It may be something of the innate neuropsychological processing of the mind that it requires the static image and concept of a thing (of itself, of anything at all) to understand and successfully comprehend that thing but then becomes mired in the static thing, its various subsequent blossoming mental associations and the ensuing endless mental chatter. Moving on from the concept of “now” to a continuous, lived experience of now appears to me to be a central challenge here.
We might extrapolate this as a general principle to organisational (perhaps doctrinal) larger-scale self-awareness and self-representation. Much of the entropic morass of international relations appears to be caused by multitudinous misrepresentations of reality which also seem to stem from base psychological confusions in the comprehension of, and narrative construction around, Self and Reality.
Words and concepts are tools to understand, negotiate and manage life and living. How often have we mistaken the word or idea for the reality that it represents and how often does this lead into fractious anxiety, insecurity and conflict ?
There is ample analytical, philosophical and psychological space for Buddhism in the evolving noosphere. I could never self-identify as Buddhist because, for me, this kind of misses the point of non-attachment. Granted, we require words to communicate and educate but then what to do with this vessel with which we have now crossed this river ?
LikeLiked by 1 person
All good questions, all “questions that have no reply” as R Frost would say! I agree with you: words mean what people want them to mean.
LikeLiked by 1 person
beautifully expressed 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person