If I could define enlightenment briefly I would say it is "the quiet acceptance of what is." ~ a quote attributed to Wayne Dyer
This catches my attention and gives me pause to ponder. In my ethics classes Hinduism has been criticized for its conflation of what is with what aught to be. On this blog and in other works, I have defended reincarnation and its relation to ethics. Yet I seem to have a mental or spiritual dilemma with this that I don’t want to quickly pass off as paradox. But I’m not sure I can get away from paradox. Here’s how I see it:
To me, enlightenment is indeed the recognition of the inherent perfection of life, the universe, and everything as it currently is. To put it another way, salvation is knowing that all so-called suffering of material existence is just part of the Great Dance; it is no longer experienced as suffering, but as something else, something better—grist for the mill, perhaps. Accepting reincarnation into my worldview allows me to see everyone in the midst of a grand and mighty balance of karma, reaping the natural consequences of their thoughts, words, and actions. Everything is as it should be, always was and will be, forever more.
And yet, my heart, my empathy, my compassion, my interrelatedness with all life refuses to accept that things are as they should be. I see too much suffering in the world caused by the selfishness and the greed of others. I am outraged at the injustices rampant in the world and the precarious position we in developed countries (especially the US) are setting up for our descendents. True to my call to ministry, I can’t not act on such feelings, and I have faith and confidence that my actions can make a difference. We can change the world, one person or one group or one community at a time, and we must strive to make it a better place. Our conscience holds us accountable.
So is this an irresolvable paradox? The concept in my mind and heart that transcends this duality is grace. The one wild card in the absolute balance of universal karma and reincarnation is Divine grace, and that grace nearly always comes through “random acts of kindness” and compassion by us humans. As I say in my forthcoming systematic theology paper, reincarnation and karma do not negate human moral agency. We still have free will, and we will be held accountable by the law of action and reaction for what we have done and what we have not done. What we’ve done will done for us, and what we have not done will not be done for us. We have the moral obligation to step into other peoples’ karma and relieve them of their suffering, if for no other reason than that is what we’d like to have happen to us if we were there. Who know, we may indeed be there before we know it, but for the grace of God and the uninvited kindness of others.
So yes, just as Krishna advised Arjuna to fight the battle as if everything depended on him, but to know in his heart and mind that the outcome depended entirely on the Divine; we too must do everything we can to make this world and our communities better and more beloved, knowing all the while that everything is actually as it should be. Maybe that’s what Wayne Dyer meant by “quiet acceptance”.
Posted by dsoliday at May 19, 2005 06:52 PM | TrackBack