I couldn't help but think of C.S. Lewis if we're talking about gazing past the shining surfaces of the world:
“You can’t go on 'seeing through”' things forever. The whole point of seeing through something is to see something through it. To “see through” all things is the same as not to see.”
It seems like, and I could be totally wrong here, I've never studied and know pretty much nothing about Eastern religions, but it seems like the biggest distinction between East and West isn't as much about the unmoved mover, that which is beyond, being something (West) or nothing (East). What strikes me, reading this anyway, is the distinction between a nothing nirvana with a mysterious force-like deity and a personal God; a nameless force beyond comprehension vs. a knowable Someone being the most real reality. They agree in the understanding of uniting with something beyond, they differ in what it is we unite with. In the East it seems that when you go beyond your senses and unite with what's really real you get a negative force. In the West you get a Person who we believe is not only the source of being but is actually Love itself.
Okay. One more bite. I assume (but you know what they say about assuming) that the smokescreen impairs us from seeing ultimate reality. But might it better be stated that our existence, even though it is finite and momentary, nonetheless provides us with signposts to that reality? With God, the material is not only real but good - in fact, paradoxically, "very good." Perhaps it is only through journey - by passing through life - that we can come to faith in that ultimate reality.
I couldn't help but think of C.S. Lewis if we're talking about gazing past the shining surfaces of the world:
“You can’t go on 'seeing through”' things forever. The whole point of seeing through something is to see something through it. To “see through” all things is the same as not to see.”
― C.S. Lewis, The Abolition of Man
Thanks as always. This is a great exercise.
Thanks for making this connection.
It seems like, and I could be totally wrong here, I've never studied and know pretty much nothing about Eastern religions, but it seems like the biggest distinction between East and West isn't as much about the unmoved mover, that which is beyond, being something (West) or nothing (East). What strikes me, reading this anyway, is the distinction between a nothing nirvana with a mysterious force-like deity and a personal God; a nameless force beyond comprehension vs. a knowable Someone being the most real reality. They agree in the understanding of uniting with something beyond, they differ in what it is we unite with. In the East it seems that when you go beyond your senses and unite with what's really real you get a negative force. In the West you get a Person who we believe is not only the source of being but is actually Love itself.
Okay. One more bite. I assume (but you know what they say about assuming) that the smokescreen impairs us from seeing ultimate reality. But might it better be stated that our existence, even though it is finite and momentary, nonetheless provides us with signposts to that reality? With God, the material is not only real but good - in fact, paradoxically, "very good." Perhaps it is only through journey - by passing through life - that we can come to faith in that ultimate reality.
Welcome back!
Spencer you do express meaning so eloquently. Love the light touches of humor as well from both you and the elder “hot Gandalf” fellow.
As I previously commented, you Klavans do know how to “dance”:
“True ease in writing comes from art, not chance,
As those move easiest who have learn'd to dance.”
Fascinating and beautifully woven observations.