Are artists egoists?

Camille Pissarro, Children on a Farm,1887 (WikiPedia)

An artist friend asked. “As an artist in displaying my work am I not an egoist?”

Tolle says that emotion and thoughts (I would say heart-mind) are not necessarily ego, but they can be. “They turn into ego only when you identify with them and they take you over completely, that is to say, when they become ‘I’.” – ANE pp131-132

My view is that each of us is part of God’s Creativity, and our creativity is part of that Creativity. As channels of God’s 3Cs, Caring, Creativity & Criticality (corresponding to the Humanities, the Arts & the Sciences) we can egoistically get in the way – or not. The artist’s lower self, pride for example, can get in the way or not – in delivering the artists experience – as in all other aspects of life. Any act, in whichever of the the Cs, can be holy and sacred – or immoral, as evidenced for example by scientists who have admitted to falsifying evidence.

The other thing to remember is that ego has a neutral meaning – it’s what stops us bumping into the furniture – i.e. as in some forms of psychology it is that part of the triadic model of self (ego, superego and id) that enables our dealings with the real, concrete world.

-0-

More about the 3Cs – HERE

 

8 dimensions of love

Know thou of a certainty that Love is the secret of God’s holy Dispensation, the manifestation of the All-Merciful, the fountain of spiritual outpourings.

 

Love is heaven’s kindly light, the Holy Spirit’s eternal breath that vivifieth the human soul.

 

Love is the cause of God’s revelation unto man, the vital bond inherent, in accordance with the divine creation, in the realities of things.

 

Love is the one means that ensureth true felicity both in this world and the next.

 

Love is the light that guideth in darkness, the living link that uniteth God with man, that assureth the progress of every illumined soul.

 

Love is the most great law that ruleth this mighty and heavenly cycle, the unique power that bindeth together the diverse elements of this material world, the supreme magnetic force that directeth the movements of the spheres in the celestial realms.

 

Love revealeth with unfailing and limitless power the mysteries latent in the universe.

 

Love is the spirit of life unto the adorned body of mankind, the establisher of true civilization in this mortal world, and the shedder of imperishable glory upon every high-aiming race and nation.

Source

What stems from ‘Holism and Evolution’ the remarkable book by J C Smuts?

 

Source WikiPedia
Source WikiPedia

Although the ideas of holism have roots that go back to ancient times the term along with ‘holistic’ stems only from its use in Field Marshal Jan Christiaan Smuts’ book published in 1926;  

holistic Look up holistic at Dictionary.com – 
holistic – 1926, coined, along with holism, by Gen. J.C. Smuts (1870-1950), from Gk. holos “whole” (see safe (adj.)). In reference to the theory that regards nature as consisting of wholes. Holistic medicine is first attested 1960.
Online Etymology Dictionary

Note that, Holistic medicine is first attested 1960‘ Here are some quotations from the book Holism and Evolution  

“Life has divided into millions of species, the fundamental units, each playing a unique role in relation to the whole” (Wilson, 1992) (p33).

“Holism is an attempt at synthesis, an attempt at bringing together many currents of thought and development such as we have seen in our day. It is not a system of philosophy” (Smuts, 1952) (p289). “This (Smuts’ Holism and Evolution) is not a treatise on philosophy; not even on the philosophy of Nature; not even on the philosophy of Evolution. It is an exploration of one idea, an attempt to sketch in large and mostly vague, tentative outline of the meaning and consequences of one particular idea” (Smuts, 1926) (p319). 

“All great truths are in their essence simple; and the absence of simplicity of statement only shows that the ultimate form has not yet been reached.” (Smuts, 1926). Holism simplifies life and causes a peaceful order.

I suspect that a lot of scientists would challenge  the idea of univsersal simplicity – surely that simplicity is part of a world-view, closer to the mystical than the scientific – nevertheless J.C. Smuts was well ahead of his time in writing his book “Holism and Evolution“.  We have lost our sense of the whole. We focus only on ‘geo’ in geology, and have forgotten the whole to which ‘geo’ belongs i.e ‘ology’, the Whole.  (The same with all of the other ‘ologies’). Holism tries to maintain the harmony between parts and whole.

SOURCE

I take in that ‘ology’ has common root with ‘logos’ which means word, reasoning and much else see HERE  From this complex etymology we can see that logos means word, reason and much else.  I take it to mean The Whole – the reality of oneness that makes of all particulars the Whole.  For some it would be the Holy Spirit or the Breath of God.

Is Eckhart Tolle anti-intellectual?

j04389291

A thoughtful respondent stimulated me in to raising a few more issues re Eckhart Tolle, so here they are.

Is Eckhart Tolle in his teachings anti-intellectual – or at least might he be playing into the hands of anti-intellectualists?

My perspective is from within a Perennial Philosophy and Universalist world-view, as is Wilber and Tolle.

So, in my understanding:-

You said:

‘Tolle does not speak of ‘non-duality as everything’. But he speaks of duality and our relationship to it often.’

The ‘it’ that relates to the non-duality I am arguing is part of the design – not just a deficiency on our part!

Does he celebrate duality as one of the two wings of being human, in this world with others. Or does he say, or imply, that the non-dual is not just desirable but the only goal – to such an extent that a newcomer might think, “I’m not good, I’m not normal, I’m not a true Tolle-ist (God forbid – but I bet it happens) unless I experience complete non-duality 24/7.”

I guess my question is, “Would God’s Creativity have failed if for all humans there was 24/7 non-duality?”

I want to argue that non-duality is the goal and indispensable to unity, peace, stability, conflict-resolution, an end to suffering etc. BUT being in duality is also normal, beautiful, testing, the source of compassion and empathy etc. It is more than just the darkness to the realization of the beauty of light.

I don’t underestimate the collective pain-body and collective insanity that continues to rule our world.

Duality is THE means of all growth and development – up to the need to realize non-duality. It’s the name of the game in this world. My understanding is that babies don’t immediately realize that they are separate beings from their mothers – although the birthing process and daily experiences get that process going pretty quickly!

My point is that although duality is not the goal – it is the means, and a means without which we would neither realize the essentiality of non-duality nor would we have the means to accomplish the realization of it.  We have to feel separate to realize at-one-ness. If this is the case then both non-duality and duality are part of the game – and part of God’s great teaching ‘machine’.

So in my view we come to realize that we need (at least in this world) two wings – not one wing and a useless stump! To change metaphors – the purpose of life is for the drop to lose itself in the Ocean – not all the time but sufficiently deeply and sufficiently often to become the conditioning bedrock for all of our living within duality. The dynamic is where knowledge comes from – and duality is not just a design fault or sin!

I have the same problem with an even greater ‘genius’ Ken Wilber. God speaks via duality as well as non-duality, He speaks via subjectivity as well as objectivity AND He speaks via mind and reason as well as their opposites.

A separate, but vitally connected subject concerns the nature of the pain-body and how it relates to mind and thought. The great Tolle also gives the impression that the mind is virtually the same as the pain-body. I would say the the ‘egoic-mind’ = the pain-body – or more accurately the pain-body is the habituated shadow-self created in us via our egoic responses.

He should be ‘condemning’ the egoic-mind not the mind! The mind free of the egoic pain-body = a ray of the Holy Spirit. I don’t think because I’m sinful, I think because I am made in the image of God! Tolle is at risk of giving the mind and thinking a really bad name, whereas they are, when free from the egoic pain-body, first in Creation – the very purpose of Creation.

I have the same problem with (possibly) an even greater ‘genius’ Abraham Joshua Heschel.

You said:
‘When a person is not in the now, it is natural to ask where they should be, because there is an inner sensing that they are not where they belong.’

The ache you refer to is when we haven’t realized that we already have enlightenment, and that it is simply a matter of ‘letting go and let God’. When we have had experiences of non-duality, and re-cognize them and re-alize them, the wood chopping is in the enlightenment and the enlightenment is in the wood chopping!

You said:
‘When you are not in the now, God continues on. Your presence in the now, or not, has no effect on God.’

Yup! The sun shines whether I choose to face it and reflect it or not.

You said:
‘Duality is not ‘not non-being’. Duality is the natural state of the world of form. Seeking an understanding of ‘non-duality’ is not the only thing to do in life, but understanding ‘non-duality’ gives one a profound foundation for all of living.’

Yup! – Beautifully put.

You said:
‘All knowledge comes from consciousness, and you are consciousness. So when you behold, or categorize, the inter-play between duality and non-duality, you, that is consciousness, has created knowledge.’

Ah but what is ‘you’?

For me your term ‘inter-play’ is the key – it indicates the dynamic between experiences of duality and of singleness: me-not me, me and ‘the greater whole of which I and all other phenomena are emanations’ etc.

The explanation that works for me goes like this. I ask of my Spirit a question. My Spirit answers, and lo the light breaks forth. The ‘I’ of course is the egoic self and the Self, ultimately, is God within. But it is more then the pain to which I am addicted – it is God’s Creativity via difference (diversity) – complementary to His/Her/It’s creativity via sameness.

Ultimately I suppose I’m arguing that to deny God’s Creativity in His creation of difference is to deny some aspect of Him/Her/It that cannot be denied. I, and you and him and her and them, are important outside of  complete self-abnegation in non-duality!  Hooray – vivre la difference – I want dia-logos from you as well as silence, I gratefully acknowledge the dia-logos within me as well as the speechless silence of complete self-abnegation!

The ‘me’ is vital – along with experiences of non-duality – for God to perpetually continue His Creation-emanation. The film projected needs a screen. Every lily of the field is different or unique as well as belonging to the same species.

If you accept the temporary naming of the un-nameable both are part of God’s teaching machine. Difference as well as sameness reveals. The uniqueness as well as the sameness of each of us ‘reveals’ – to us and to others. It is ‘me and non-duality’ that gives rise to development in consciousness, which gives rise to the kind of knowing to which you refer.

This ‘knowing-that-comes-through-raised-consciousness’, comes to us as a ‘gift’ without book-learning and academic study. It is the majority of what we know.

An Islamic (hence Arabic terms) and Bahá’í distinction helps (me) here;

SOURCE: Two words for knowledge, but very different kinds of knowledge. Ilm can be acquired by education and training and through the exercise of reason. Irfan is higher knowledge, or gnosis, that can only be acquired by, first, education, and then contemplation under the guidance of a master. The guidance would include spiritual training in zikr, music (sama) and meditation. Ilm is expected to lead to the sober contemplation of God as both Creator and Judge—his awesome power– whereas irfan may lead to ecstasy as a person is simply overwhelmed by God’s immense beauty and falls in love with that Beauty.  SOURCE

The sheer weight of emphases in Tolle might give the impression that mind and thinking = bad. Whereas although the soul is infinite because it is ultimately God, and the mind is finite, the two are essential – from our perspective. Religions can suffer from anti-intellectualism as well as what a friend calls ‘adminology’ in which the essential heart is set aside in favour of jurisprudence and nit-picking.

I am wondering if Tolle, understandably, started from the (to me erroneous) Western view that separates heart and mind, as opposed to the Chinese view of heart-mind – ‘xin’.

I don’t think Tolle is anti-intellectual but I wish he would celebrate a bit more the other wing of being human – duality, without which non-duality would not be.

******

May the Nameless One, who some call God,  finish raising up the Self-actualized 2% , the yeast for the bread of humanity!

Maybe He/She/It already has and they are just really badly organized!

“How does the energy generated by Tolle actually get transformed into social action and social transformation?”

Now that’s a really challenging question!

Photo source: Microsoft Clipart