On the Meaning of Sin
An Essay By
Christopher Stewart
Smashwords Edition – February 2012
§
On the Meaning of Sin by Christopher Stewart
is licensed under a
Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported License
Permissions beyond the scope of this license may be available here
§
« Everything has mind in the lead, has mind in the forefront, is made by mind. If one speaks or acts with a corrupt mind, misery will follow as the wheel of a cart follows the foot of the ox.
Everything has mind in the lead, has mind in the forefront, is made by mind. If one speaks or acts with a pure mind, happiness will follow, like a shadow that never leaves. »
- Dhammapada, Chapter I, « Couplets, » verses 1 and 2.
§
§
1. Introduction
Liberation
In the week preceding my decision to tackle this essay, upon interpreting one of the daily tarot readings using which I confirm my direction and evaluate my progress, I discovered the extended description of the Liberty card from the William Blake Tarot of the Creative Imagination, including the following excerpt :
« For Blake, Judgment, or human liberation, occurs whenever error is eliminated, and this can happen at any time, individually or societally. »
[source : Facade]
In many tarot decks, the equivalent of the Liberty card is the Judgment card, typically depicting trumpet-blowing angels waking up the dead from out of their graves. The imagery in Blake's version is very similar, but it prominently features a butterfly rising up to embrace the entire universe, after having completed its metamorphosis.
While the mystic ideal of unification with the divine represented in the artwork has its appeal, the question remains nonetheless pragmatic in its essence, as far as I am concerned anyhow. In short, the enigmatic part of the endeavour consists in identifying error. Once this is done, ridding oneself of it gets, if not necessarily easy, at least achievable. And thus, finally tasting the sweet nectar of liberation gradually becomes less of a farfetched aspiration, and more of a distinct possibility, until it eventually turns into an unavoidable fate.
Phrased in more prosaic terms, the above simply means that as long as what provokes undesirable occurrences is unknown, those unwanted hindrances are bound to happen again. And once one begins to eliminate those causes, the process grows increasingly self-refining, as mistakes and their effects become more and more evident, up to the point when it is quite clear that only such and such a deed could have brought on such and such an outcome.
Like Blake, I believe that liberation can be attained at any time, by anyone. I trust that heaven and hell are coextensive, and that both realms can thus be experienced in one and the same location, and in fact regardless of the location, as a function of one's state of mind.
Motivation
In publishing this essay, I don't aim to convert nor to convince, but I attempt to share knowledge I have acquired along my journey. I readily acknowledge that realities are defined subjectively, and as such that our respective worlds are essentially unique, and thus that the contents suggested therein might not accommodate everyone, nor apply to all. Nevertheless, I hope the document will be of aid to some of those who will consider it.
I obviously assume that most living beings, if not all, would prefer to enjoy an existence wherein they can revel in the activities of their choosing, free of the pains that come with the disagreeable setbacks that life sometimes proposes. Responding to the requirements of one's path is demanding enough as it is without having to address additional annoyances that get in the way of personal development.
Growing up is hard work already, who wants otherwise friendly and dependable people who incomprehensibly start to behave in an antagonistic or detrimental manner ? Who likes devices that stop operating without warning just when they're most needed ? Who strives for public expositions of their limitations ? Who relishes doorways that disappear before one can make it pass their threshold, especially after having toiled forever and a day to witness them materialize from out of the clear blue sky ?
Still, what if all those insufferable deterrents and myriad other similar irritations were actually the results of one's own faults, and as such as many clues inviting one to reform and to regain the itinerary they have selected for themselves ?
It is with attention to those concerns that I feel impelled to prepare the present text, confident that my perspective on the question will benefit at least some of the readers.
Mission
In the following sections, I will undertake to provide a concise yet rigorous explanation of my reflections on this matter of liberation from error. Also, in order to supply references to help the interested seeker recognize possible causes of mistakes in their own processes, I will offer a succinct overview of what is conventionally regarded as wrongdoing in Buddhist and Christian culture, along with alternative tracks of inquiry discovered empirically.
But first, please allow me to reveal parts of my trajectory so as to clarify the standpoint from which my observations have been carried out.
§
2. A Bit of Personal History
Figurines of the Virgin Mary
Religion wasn't a central theme in the house where I grew up. Not that it was entirely absent, but if my parents were fervent Catholics, they concealed it well, and they certainly didn't impose it on me.
I can vaguely remember there were crucifixes in some of the rooms, figurines of the Virgin Mary and other saintly characters on shelves, and framed images and paintings that either depicted holy scenes, or at least evoked the sacred. And there was also this peculiar Jesus Christ Wanted Dead or Alive poster that struck me as compelling in a subversive kind of way at the time.
On festive occasions, when all the children were present, or when we had guests, my father gave thanks at the beginning of the meals, and we all made the sign of the cross at the end of the prayer. But otherwise, I don't recollect us praying, except before going to bed. We used to recite the same verse I was surprised to hear again upon discovering Metallica's Enter Sandman :
« Now I lay me down to
sleep,
Pray the Lord my soul to keep,
If I die before I
wake,
Pray the Lord my soul to take. »
We had catechism class throughout elementary school. Attending church on Sundays was a compulsory observance, and I wasn't particularly fond of it, deeming the ceremonies tedious and protracted. I would often try to come up with reasons for not going, although I think I complied anyhow, usually if not always.
And basically, that was it. I don't recall being preached to nor lectured at home, or not in relation to those questions at any rate. Perhaps it was different for my siblings, but I was pretty much left to my own devices regarding spiritual matters.
I have clear memories of one specific week when I was sick and missed school. I must have been seven or eight years old. There was a copy of the New Testament on the desk in my bedroom, and I eventually grabbed it and read large parts of it, out of boredom at first, and then with curiosity. In retrospect, I'm quite sure the experience influenced me given my young age, yet it manifestly didn't turn me into a devout faithful.
A few years later, a priest visited our school. At some point during his speech, he asked us to write down one of the things we would like God to assist us with, or something along those lines. My request was that he would help us develop our individual aptitudes, so that we could become better persons. But when the clergyman delivered it out loud in front of the whole group, he said he didn't understand my suggestion. As it seemed simple enough to me already, I didn't bother to explain. Probably, that contributed to my general impression that religion was not for me at the time.
For Weddings and Funerals
After elementary school was over, attending mass wasn't required anymore. Catechism class was still mandatory up until the equivalent of grade eleven or so. Possibly was it before that, but I can't remember precisely.
My family stopped going to church altogether, except for Midnight Mass at Christmas, and occasions such as weddings and funerals. I never inquired about the official justification, but I came to the conclusion that my parents had been going mainly to accompany my sister and I, and now that it was optional insofar as our academic curriculum was concerned, their principal motivation was gone.
From then on, my world remained nearly completely devoid of spiritual preoccupations and activities for many years. They would only resurface much later.
Beer is the Mind-Killer
When I was studying electrical engineering at Université Laval, I subscribed to the view that religion was the refuge of uneducated people who lived in the past, apparently unaware of the recent discoveries of science. In my opinion, their beliefs were crutches to which those folks held on dearly for lack of a more sophisticated way of dealing with reality.
Interestingly enough, in hindsight I recognize that this corresponds to the period when I was at my most dissolute. I was in my twenties, and I used to drink excessive amounts of beer and pull quantity of other dishonourable deeds that I would now qualify as missing the mark by more than a fair margin. I'm certain I kept on paying a price for those mistakes, long after I committed them, primarily in terms of harbouring a delinquent, paranoid stance on life. Yet, evidently, I didn't know better at the time.
While I don't recall considering myself an atheist, I was convinced that there could be no such thing as a God and that religions were thus all intrinsically flawed. I obviously had doubts though. My then reason-based approach, as laudable as some might have claimed it to be, just wasn't equipped to properly address the most fundamental problems of existence.
Remover of Obstacles
Thanks to a girl friend who one evening wore a t-shirt she had brought back from Sri Lanka, and which featured a depiction of Ganesha, the elephant-headed deity widely revered as the Remover of Obstacles, and the Lord of Beginnings, I eventually chanced upon Buddhist philosophy. It immediately attracted me because of its numerous similarities with reflections about my own inner workings that I had been entertaining ever since attending a graduate class on neural networks.
Following that fateful finding in the mid-nineties, I decided to study Buddhism and to adopt some of its practices. I acquired a version of the Dhammapada, an initiatory collection of aphorisms attributed to the Buddha. This primer provided many pointers on the culture, and references to other documents that I also read later on. I experimented with meditation and reciting mantras, and they became part of my daily routine. I even transferred a few of those especially insightful scriptures to electronic format during the introductory years.
In parallel, I explored other avenues, including computer programming, music and the arts in general, and psychology and physics, through which I learned about the endeavours of pioneers such as Carl Jung and David Bohm. It is while perusing the writings of the latter that I ultimately stumbled upon the seed of what developed into the unorthodox perspective on the matter of error, and some of its related notions, that I share via this essay.
Through Different Eyes
While I was manifestly exposed to Christian influence in the course of my childhood, my observations on the issue of liberation thus principally come from a non-Christian point of view.
In the following section, I first state the traditional explanations of sin and hell as they have been presented to me, and I contrast the core concepts with alternative interpretations. Using these new meanings, I then propose a different take on the question, one that better describes how things appear to me when seen from where my hybrid trajectory in the worlds of arts, science, and Oriental philosophy has led me.
§
3. Sin, You Say ?
Traditional Views
I can't recollect how early in my childhood the concept of sin was first presented to my mind. I would hazard to say that I spent most of my preadult existence believing, or in fact perhaps a more accurate word would be considering, the idea that sins were some peculiarly bad actions through which one would be condemned to hell. My understanding was that sinners would thus suffer eternal damnation in the underworld once their life would be over. Or at least, such would be their fate, assuming the whole thing wasn't a mere invention of overimaginative religious.
For the purpose of this essay, that's essentially what I would refer to as the traditional Catholic or Christian explanation of the question. In that framework, during the course of their passage on Earth, human beings commit both good and not so good deeds, of which some of the latter are sins. Then, when their time is up, they are judged based on their choices, and those who have sinned are permanently consigned to the nether regions.
Similar notions occur in some of the Buddhist scriptures I have read. For instance, in the Bardo Thodol, better known as the Tibetan Book of the Dead, there are descriptions of the Six Realms of Existence, including the hell realm that comprises several specific hells. Also, in the Dhammapada, there are mentions of evil-doers being reborn in hell as an upshot of their wrongdoing. One fundamental difference with the Christian inferno is that in that particular Eastern cosmology, the denizens are not prisoners of those terrible locations forever, but they can be reincarnated in higher domains once their negative karma is exhausted.
In my opinion, those orthodox ways of approaching the matter don't do much to help individuals improve their experiences. Or in any case, they don't work for everyone. Rather, they raise all sorts of interrogations regarding the actuality of the underworld, and of heaven by the same token, and they hinge on faith, or fear, depending on how one sees the issue. If someone isn't readily convinced that there is an afterlife, those manners of comprehending error seems pointless to me. Why not sin if one is only confronted to the consequences in an hypothetical future that cannot be evidenced and must be taken on trust ? In that context, it is all the more tempting to transgress the rules and to rationalize that there won't be such a place as the netherworld, if there's an hereafter altogether to begin with.
Moreover, those conventional depictions are not just ineffective for the skeptics, they are also potentially misleading for all of us, insofar as they fail to properly describe, or even to simply address, how the present functions. Or at any rate, they don't correspond to what happens in my reality.
Then again, perhaps there are variant interpretations of those ideas of sin, of hell, and of rebirth, which could better serve us.
Sin : Hamartia and Metanoia
In David Bohm's Unfolding Meaning, in one of the dialogues, the following definition of sin and some of the associated terms are evoked :
« Missing the point. Yes, hamartia which meant missing the point, missing the mark. Now that got translated as sin. And repentance was metanoia, meaning a transformation of the mind, and got translated as pain, right? Penitence, repentance. The point is that repentance is merely to understand that you missed the mark, you see? (laughter) Therefore evil is missing the mark, basically. It is confusion, right? Its ultimate source is the kind of confusion I described about thought. »
[source : Unfolding Meaning]
In my view, the above paragraph hints at several interesting insights.
First, it suggests that the original meaning of sin might have evolved from a pragmatic perspective instead of dogmatic one. In other words, presumably, what constitutes error has not been revealed mysteriously by deity to prophet, and transmitted to laypersons, but has rather been learned through an empirical procedure. Possibly, seekers attempting to attain specific objectives discovered that some of their actions weren't conducive to their goals, but caused hindrances that prevented their progress. Maybe, the occurrences compelled them to reassess the question, and to develop a vocabulary to designate those deeds which were wide of the mark, and to document their experiences of getting back on track.
Furthermore, I find this particular way of phrasing the notions introduces relativity in an otherwise rigid model. Whereas, in the traditional Catholic explanation for instance, sins are well delineated, in this alternative reading, they can conceivably be quest-dependent, or quester-dependent. That is to say, while there are probably behaviours that are intrinsically bad for all living beings, regardless of context, most likely as a result of the physiology they have in common, at the same time, it is imaginable that what is off-target for one individual might not be so for all. And it is also entirely admissible that what represents a mistake for someone in one situation, might not be a fault at all for them in another scenario. Then, the idea of an external figure of authority proclaiming what is right and what is not makes very little sense. Only oneself is in position to establish those facts beyond doubt from their own observations.
In addition, the passage intimates what I refer to as the redirection mechanism, which is basically the principle that hamartia triggers metanoia. Or, if you will, missing the mark creates the circumstances that will prompt the wrongdoer to repent, to understand that the mark was missed, and perhaps how exactly it was missed. It enables one to transform their mind accordingly so as to avoid repeating that same sin in the future. It is the assurance that when error is committed, the cosmos will respond with the information required to recognize the mistake, and then to eliminate it. Similarly, it is the guarantee that as long as there is no transgression, there will be no reason for penitence. One's aim won't necessarily be achieved immediately, but there won't be impediments nor deterrents to suffer. The road will remain clear, although there might still be distance left to cover.
And last but not least, the terminology implies that there is a mark. Stated differently, it entails that there is something as having chosen the perfect path, and heading towards the perfect destination. In turn, this opens up the prospect of employing this course-correction automatism to navigate to a definite outcome. Actually, advancing in such a manner towards one predetermined fate is potentially all we do during our existence. Or it could be that we are allowed to rely on the indications of a benevolent universe to accomplish the purposes we have selected of freewill.
Hell : Setbacks and Deterrents
In the conventional Christian view, Inferno is described as a fiery place full of demons who torment the poor souls sentenced to dwell therein. For their part, the Buddhist Narakas seem more varied, and include both cold and hot hells. They each feature a specific means of torture, such as the screaming hell, the piercing hell, and the crushing hell, and the duration of the lives of the evil-doers in each of them is precisely stipulated.
But manifestly, or inasmuch as I can extrapolate from my own adventures in any case, those nether regions are most probably symbolic depictions of painful occurrences.
Possibly, a more general description of hell would be an experience of being where one doesn't want to be, doing what they don't want to do, or undergoing what they don't want to go through, all the while feeling aversion for what they consider to be adverse conditions.
In contrast, a more day-to-day explanation of heaven would be an experience of doing a desirable activity in an agreeable context, in an appreciative mood.
Then, on the basis of these two representations, it is evident that both heaven and hell can indeed be visited not just at the end of one's life, but during one's earthly passage also. And obviously, one doesn't even need to move for that to happen.
Moreover, the process of liberation, or of ridding oneself of error, can now be outlined as recurrent downfalls from heaven into hell, followed by as many ascents as one finds their way back up to the higher domain.
While in paradise, when a mistake is made, the individual is confronted to nuisances. In a more chronologically plausible sequence, or it is for me anyhow, deterrents or setbacks are first encountered in the temporary inferno of annoyances, prompting one to acknowledge they are not in day-to-day heaven anymore, and that a fault has been committed earlier.
So, in those descents from the state where all is fine and enjoyable progress is steady, there lie the opportunities to recognize that there have been transgressions, and perhaps to understand the nature of the associated wrongdoing at the same time.
Having to face a deterrent, that is to say, questioning what was previously trusted in the light of contradictory feedback from the cosmos, might indicate that a minor error was made.
Having to suffer a setback, and thus a repetition of some sort while what has been lost is recreated, might point to a major mistake. Or maybe is it the result of an accumulation of lesser sins of which the impacts were unwittingly or systematically ignored.
As far as I am concerned, some of those disheartening incidents have no local effects, but rather have repercussions in the world at large. For instance, as a consequence of a fault, I might become aware that someone who defends the same values as I will be embroiled in a scandal, or that a revered inspiring figure has died.
Arguably, a setback can be thought of as a deterrent accompanied by a manifestation in the immediate physical sphere of the seeker. Or, phrased alternatively, a deterrent can be seen as a setback with only a psychological component, wherein doubt momentarily assails the mental structure cultivated up until then.
All the same, in those occurrences reside the assurance that something one has done has caused day-to-day heaven to vanish, and temporary hell to take its place. In other words, as an upshot of missing the mark, an occasion for repentance has been conjured up. While disappointment might appear to be the appropriate reaction, the wiser attitude consists in taking heed and resuming forward motion.
This articulates the cornerstone of the redirection principle wherein the experience that entails from transgression inherently harbours the course-correcting incentive. Without this mechanism, wrongdoing would remain unidentified and thus potentially replicated, which would ultimately translate in never reaching the intended destination, always advancing in a slightly off-target manner instead.
A possibly useful way of viewing the phenomenon would be to regard paradise as the basic condition, and infernos as merely transitory sideroads that one mistakenly takes, with the guarantee that the detour will provide the lesson needed to avoid committing the error again.
The observation also applies to faulty thought processes. In some circles, this is known as alignment. According to this terminology, one is in alignment when their actions, feelings, and thoughts are in harmony with respect to one another. That is to say, if what one thinks in relation to a particular matter doesn't mirror how they feel about it, then this is hamartia. This missing the mark gives rise to a disagreeable impression of dissonance. The unpleasant upsurge happens for the simple purpose of inciting the thinker to reconsider their thoughts. So here too, hamartia provokes metanoia, the change of mind that will allow the individual to rematch their ruminations to their feelings, as this is the one of the two factors on which they have a certain degree of control. In this fashion, as soon as the divergence is resolved, the associated influence is silenced. The thinker is back on track, and gloom and doom are nowhere in sight.
This constatation implies that what one feels should be trusted over what one thinks, suggesting that truth is continuously reflected in one's feelings. In contrast, whereas thought has evidently also access to truth at times, in my opinion it is generally too mercurial to be relied upon systematically.
To sum up, in this perspective, every instance of setback and deterrence is the response of the cosmos to missing the mark in some way or another. If painful, they nonetheless carry information on how to accurately hit the bullseye at the next opportunity. And conversely, as long as there are no transgressions, there is no penitence to undergo. The adage, see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil, is verified. While one refrains from evil, they suffer no evils. In the absence of sin, there is no retribution, but only steady improvement. If there is no hamartia, there is no metanoia either, and thus no compulsion to adjust one's mind.
And what is liberation, if not this uninterrupted experience of progressing towards one chosen goals and keeping from wrongdoing and its consequences ? Or alternatively stated, what is liberation if not the day-to-day heaven ?
Rebirth : Here in this Now Afterlife
In the conventional Catholic explanation, or at least the one which has been imparted to me, the aftermaths of sin are met at the end of one's life. As mentioned earlier, to me this is inexact and thus ineffective let alone potentially misleading. The repercussions of error are indeed encountered in the present existence, or at any rate, they are in mine.
In the Buddhist framework, the timing of the arising of infernal occurrences is function of the exhaustion of karma. In other words, when the karma sustaining the realm one finds themselves in is used up, they are reborn in a different domain, whose nature is determined by the merit one has accumulated on their journey. While being arguably less clear-cut than the Christian view, it has the virtue of actually describing my own universe more precisely.
Then again, if afterlife and rebirth are taken metaphorically, maybe those depictions are not that far apart.
In popular culture, and in science fiction stories in particular, the idea of a hero being either magically or technologically rematerialized in another location and at another epoch to accomplish some world-saving mission is familiar. Movies such as 12 Monkeys and more recently Source Code constitute eloquent examples.
The everyday equivalent to those circumstances would be sleep, or rather, waking up. Generally, unless one has mischievous, or perhaps mean friends, one wakes up in the same place where they laid down. Or I should say, the place they remember having laid down in, as when waking up from slumber, everything that has happened up to that point is a mere mental event. Preoccupations, the impression of continuity, one's own sense of identity, all such considerations are objects of mind. Even observing that something hasn't moved in the surroundings since the last time one was aware is an intellection, impossible to confirm with absolute certainty. Attempting to validate that one has a past through whatever element of the environment is likewise bound to fail because the process is evidently dependent on what can be recollected. Thus, ultimately, there are presumably no empirical distinctions between awakening and being magically or technologically rematerialized elsewhere and elsewhen, except probably for the impression of continuity. Coming to one's senses after anaesthesia would also be a comparable situation.
A similar reflection can be carried out in relation to how we advance from moment to moment. Despite my efforts to remain vigilant and attentive, temporary lapses still disrupt my activities on occasion, typically while in multitasking mode. Then I wonder, what was I doing again ? Or, how did I end up here ? Or, why did I want to go to that web page ? To me, this is akin to waking up from sleep, to the extent that there is sudden consciousness of the setting after a gap in the continuity, and the concerns of the immediate past become rapidly fleeting memories.
What I'm trying to emphasize is that the experience of rebirth, figuratively speaking, is common. Thus, in that perspective, the proposition that the consequences of wrongdoing are encountered in one's upcoming existence simply signifies that they don't necessarily occur at once, and that there might be a delay before they come about. In other words, afterlife can refer to the next day, the next hour, or the next second, and not just to a vague intimation of the time following physical death.
As to why the repercussions are not always faced right away, I suggest that this might be due to accumulation. For instance, for a person who has committed a string of misdeeds, it is conceivable that some of the retributions patiently wait for their turn, while others are currently being dealt with. Stated differently, the individual might have unwittingly created a series of hereafters, or redirections, that they must undergo sequentially to regain access to paradise. In addition, if karma is taken into account, we can imagine how someone who has earned an abundant treasury of merit might be immune to adverse effects for as long as their good works sustain their heavenly domain, and in this fashion witness the ripening of their faults only much later.
Alternative View
So now, through the lenses of those alternative readings, a new picture emerges.
Sin doesn't mean disobedience to a dogmatic code of conduct established by reputed infallible authorities, but instead encompasses the decisions that don't lead to the intended objectives, and that are potentially prompted by confusion regarding the nature of things.
Disagreeable annoyances are in fact the mechanical responses of a benevolent cosmos endeavouring to help one recognize they have missed the mark in some manner or another earlier on, and thus course-correcting them back to their desired path.
Hell is not a permanent destination, but merely a transitory, albeit unpleasant passage thanks to which one can learn their lessons, and as such constitutes the road to recovery.
Rebirth in the netherworld as the result of one's mistakes equates to being offered the information needed in order to understand how transgression has been perpetrated, and to gather incentives to avoid repeating that same error in the future.
Heaven is the enjoyment of tranquil progress towards one's goals.
While remote from what has been imparted to me as a child, the above interpretation has the virtue of actually corresponding to how things unfold in my reality. And I suspect it matches the gist of the traditional religious explanations, if we consider them to be symbolic rather than literal descriptions. Presumably more importantly, it is verifiable empirically by anyone.
The Wheel of the Cart Follows the Foot of the Ox
In the preceding section, I have outlined the what, the where, and the when of sin, in an attempt to better delineate its signification. Based on these unorthodox representations of the core concepts, I have then articulated an unconventional perspective on the whole, one which hopefully provides a more pragmatic and thus more useful approach to the question.
Next, I will propose a look at the role of mind, and at the consequences of wrongdoing on that function.
§
4. Mind-Killers
Mind in the Lead
The opening aphorisms of the Dhammapada quoted in the epigraph, and included again below, eloquently explain the role of the mind :
« Everything has mind in the lead, has mind in the forefront, is made by mind. If one speaks or acts with a corrupt mind, misery will follow as the wheel of a cart follows the foot of the ox.
Everything has mind in the lead, has mind in the forefront, is made by mind. If one speaks or acts with a pure mind, happiness will follow, like a shadow that never leaves. »
[source : Dhammapada: The Sayings of Buddha]
The couplet can be seen as yet another way of describing the principle of hamartia and metanoia. The first verse presents the mind which still entertains error, and asserts that its actions necessarily engender misery, or occasions for repentance if you will. The process of course-correction can thus take place, and as long as there is no abandonment, wrongdoing will eventually be eliminated, leading to the situation depicted in the second verse. The dyad ultimately proposes that the reward of the liberated person is an existence free of sorrows.
But more significantly, the sayings declare the all-importance of the mind. They state that everything is made by mind. Thus, mind is the creation tool using which the individual shapes their experiences.
Of Sand Mouse and Fremen
In the excellent and wholeheartedly recommended novel Dune, there is mention of the Litany Against Fear, a fictional incantation some of the characters resort to when confronting perilous circumstances :
« I must not fear. Fear is the mind-killer. Fear is the little-death that brings total obliteration. I will face my fear. I will permit it to pass over me and through me. And when it has gone past I will turn the inner eye to see its path. Where the fear has gone there will be nothing. Only I will remain. »
[source : Bene Gesserit entry in Wikipedia]
One phrase stands out from the rest : fear is the mind-killer. While insightful in itself as an observation, the formulation also encapsulates the gist of the entire passage, that hints at the crucial notion which might be thought of as the less desirable, inevitable consequence of the axiom outlined in the previous paragraphs. Namely, if mind produces realities, then killing mind implies that the associated realities won't be brought about. Or if they do, they will only be incomplete variations of the originally minded possibility.
Sin is the Mind-Killer
During those blessed periods of day-to-day heaven when I continuously hit the target, my cosmos emphatically sustains my ideals. Or, at any rate, it doesn't oppose them.
By cosmos I refer to the totality of whatever is not under my direct volitional control. This includes people and objects in my environments, tangible and virtual, and facets of my own body which operate through their own intelligence, such as the cardiovascular system for instance. I reckon this also comprises the aspects of my mind that sense, and that I can't change, although I can obviously block them with layers of intellectualization. I must stress that I take cosmos in its meaning of a universe seen as an ordered, harmonious whole.
On the other hand, at the moment of missing the mark, I ordinarily have doubts, yet I tend to rationalize them and justify my transgression based on how I feel at the time. Then, between hamartia and metanoia, I am usually at peace with my choice. When the metanoia takes place, I once more experience doubts, and I'm soon under the general impression that my cosmos feeds them for a while, before letting me off the hook. Again, some errors seem to have local effects exclusively, that is to say, insofar as I can tell, they have no repercussions beyond my own individual sphere. In contrast, some faults have apparently no unmediated impact on my proximate conditions, but affect me nonetheless because they involve matters or persons that are important to me. In the repenting, I undergo something of an exhaustive revision process whereby I examine the related decisions and events that have led me to the mistake. Ultimately, the painful circumstances subsides and I can resume progress.
From those considerations I propose that one of the aftermaths of sin is mind killing. In other words, wrongdoing conjures up situations that are likely to kill mind.
The positive upshot of this is that the metanoia will attempt to kill the part of the mind that is corrupt. Stated differently, it will remove, or at the very least weaken, the underlying construct from which error has stemmed.
The less agreeable dimension of this mechanism, besides suffering the incertitudes, is that the occurrences contribute to discourage the seeker from pursuing their dream. For one, they typically cause delays and imply that additional efforts will have to be deployed before the goal can be reached. Often, they prevent the seizing of opportunities that vanish instead into oblivion. In the cases of major setbacks, they equate to segments of the road that must be walked anew, or alternatively, sections of the architecture that have to be rebuilt. At those junctures, it is tempting to succumb to the charm of the Cartesian mind if it intervenes and suggests that the entire endeavour isn't worthwhile. Moreover, repeated mind killing might convince the quester that the aim is unachievable, and so that their faith has been unwisely invested in a project they should never have tackled in the first place.
I find this is especially true when one is not aware of the factors in play. But even with knowledge of what's going on, I note that my inclination remains to begin by supposing that no misdeed has been committed, and thus to blame the course-correcting automatism that I temporarily deem unreliable and as such, questionable. Still, as I reevaluate the happening, my stance gets readjusted. I must emphasize that there is an incremental gain following each iteration, and that the revisions become, if not always less deep, at any rate less protracted and less dreadful. In parallel, faith in the framework, and in the cosmos by the same token, gradually grows stronger.
Equanimity is presumably the nearest thing to an assurance of conservation of one's creations that can be wielded in response to such incidents. Or at least, it's the best strategy I know of in dealing with experiences of this kind. Allowing oneself to be carried away by the flow of emotions, in contrast, tends to amplify the devastating consequences of the hamartia and thus to potentially transform minor annoyances into full-blown catastrophes.
Fear constitutes a good illustration of this principle. At its onset an erroneous thought process that brings forth unpleasant impressions by entertaining misaligned and misguided musings, it can actually have unfortunate repercussions if sustained at length. For instance, one might miss totally desirable occasions in trying to protect themselves from hypothetical menaces conceived in the continuity of a fearful reaction to otherwise inviting propositions. Yet, the original upsurge of dissonance could have been a sufficient clue that the distrustful attitude was wide of the mark.
And in the light of those observations, I point out in passing that there is something as compounding sin by misinterpreting the cosmic hints to the effect that divergent progress is already underway.
While painful, becoming suddenly conscious that part of the mind one is nurturing has been killed nonetheless contains helpful information. Such circumstances can be turned into chances of identifying previously unrecognized types of transgressions, possibly of the more subtle variety. This seems especially appropriate when there are no physical manifestations, but merely a mental component of regress triggering a sort of déjà vu and a realization that one's breadth of insight once reached a broader vista, for lack of better terminology. As far as I am concerned, faults related to alimentation often fall under this category.
Sometimes I Get It Wrong
As indicated above, whenever I must undergo mind killing, my habitual reflex is to first deny all insinuations that I have made a mistake, to suspect the redirection mechanism, and to calumniate the cosmos, though that script is receding since I've come to understand that it is also sin. Then I indulge in some degree of despair for a time, albeit while attempting to resist by all means. I eventually accept that the episode has been caused solely as a result of my decisions, and I usually already know what I have done wrong. I fight against choosing to remain deterred for the rest of eternity as I wait for the revisionary wave to draw back. The natural resilience of the underlying structure ultimately kicks in, provoking a counter-wave during which I strengthen my resolve and convince myself that I won't make such a foolish error ever again. Finally, I resume advancing towards the objective. I reckon this corresponds to removing certain of the corrupt elements of the mind, and reprogramming it with a more beneficial strategy.
Ordinarily, I find that the sound aspects of the thus-killed mind, in which is reflected the sought-after experience, can be rekindled pretty soon. However, it appears to depend on the gravity of the bad deed. And I notice that upon their successful rehabilitation, there are frequently pleasant and faith-supporting concomitant occurrences either in my local sphere or in the world at large.
I should stress that this depiction is provided for illustration purposes, and not as the best template to be applied in practice. It can obviously be improved.
What on Earth is Wrong with Me ?
The notion of wrongdoing is presumably universal. The views on the matter differ with cultures, ranging from terse statements of principles to more elaborate systems such as the six hundred and thirteen commandments in Judaism.
In the following sections, as a way of suggesting references using which the interested reader might be able to recognize potential errors in their own endeavours, I will propose a quick outline of what is considered to be sin in the two traditions that are most familiar to me, beginning with Buddhism.
§
5. Sin in Buddhist Culture
The Three
In Buddhist culture, there are three main mental poisons. In some nomenclatures they are referred to as anger, greed, and folly, while in others, the words ignorance, aversion, and attachment are employed.
Ignorance is considered to be the source of the other two. At its essence, it is identification to a self that exists independently of everything else. From this belief stems the dualistic view of I and not I. This discrimination gives rise to attachment and aversion, as phenomena are perceived as threatening or comforting, desirable or unpleasant.
Buddhist ethics are thus established on the underlying idea that there is no such thing as a self that is apart from everything else. On this ground, it is easy to realize how actions which are hurtful to others are in fact self-injurious, and hence fundamentally erroneous.
The Five
The basic Buddhist code of ethics comprises five precepts that laypeople undertake to uphold. These behavioural guidelines consist in commitments to refrain from harming living beings, stealing, sexual misconduct, lying, and intoxication. They are traditionally formulated as training rules, as follows :
I undertake the training rule to abstain from taking life.
I undertake the training rule to abstain from taking what is not given.
I undertake the training rule to abstain from sexual misconduct.
I undertake the training rule to abstain from false speech.
I undertake the training rule to abstain from fermented drink that causes heedlessness.
[source : Five Precepts entry in Wikipedia]
Some lineages have different lists which vary in number and phrasing. There are also more elaborate lists for novice monks and nuns, and for laypersons who wish to practice a more ascetic lifestyle.
The Dust Cloud
For my own part, taking the five precepts has brought about a definite improvement in the quality of my experiences. Whereas, prior to that decision, disarray had more or less been a constant companion in some form or another, from that moment on many things gradually became much clearer, allowing me to make sense of circumstances that used to bewilder me, and to eventually escape them. That revealing education inspired me the analogy presented below. In this metaphor, the consequences of not keeping the precepts are likened to a cloud of dust surrounding an individual who cannot elude it, as their every attempt only sustains the hazy hindrance :
« Know, O foremost children of Buddhas, most deserving of beings, that it is like the condition of one who finds themselves in the middle of a dense cloud of dust, not being able to see past a few paces, trying to go this way or that way, but never leaving the dust cloud, or trying to keep walking in one direction until they escape the dust cloud, or trying to outrun the dust cloud, or trying to blow the dust cloud away with their breath, or trying to wave their hands in the hopes of clearing the dust away, or trying to wave a piece of cloth in the hopes of clearing the dust away, or trying to jump over the dust cloud, or trying to crawl under the dust cloud, or trying to dig a tunnel under the dust cloud, or trying to throw more dust at the cloud so as to scare it away.
So it is, O most faithful ones, with one who is not upholding the precepts, trying all sorts of things to gain clarity, oblivious to the fact that their own activity creates the conditions depriving them of clarity, just like the one who finds themselves in the middle of the dense cloud of dust doesn't realize that their many attempts at eluding it only raise more dust up in the air.
And so it is, O most venerable of beings, that upholding the precepts is like sitting still and waiting for the dust to settle naturally, so that clarity can emerge, and so that one can realize what had been sustaining the cloud all along. »
Decoherence
From my own experiments, it appears that breaking the precepts is also hamartia. It seems important to stress that I can't distinguish whether the error is the result of breaking the precepts themselves or rather of breaking my vow to uphold them. Nevertheless, for me, violating them gives rise to the conditions that lead to metanoia.
Via recent one-hundred-and-forty-character-long interactions with a remote friend, it has come to my attention that some practitioners consider that transgressions are function of amount. More accurately, the friend in question claimed that smoking euphoriants merely once in a while wasn't against the precepts, and that in fact represented his saving grace as it afforded him temporary evasion from frequently hellish circumstances wherein he was the victim of recurrent beatings.
My own experiences of breaking the five precepts and other Buddhist rules of conduct, such as refraining from eating meat, indicate that it is instead a matter of intention and not of number. In this respect, it looks to me as if the act of transgressing corresponds to events known as decoherences in the many-worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics. Within the context of that framework, essentially, all the possible histories and futures of a process already exist, and it is through decoherence that only one of these combinations remains, to be inspected by the local observer. The act of transgressing thus equates to the selection of a particular continuum, and indeed translates to being metaphorically reborn therein. Insofar as I can remember, it was actually the case that even the first hint of a sip of fermented drink was enough to catapult me into a hamartian reality, which I propose as adjective to qualify a flawed spacetime wherein the requirements for metanoia hover about, ready to intervene.
Further communications with my distant friend have tended to confirm my position, albeit non-equivocally, that his habit was effectively provoking the terrifying situation.
For those who at this juncture might wonder which substances are covered by the fifth precept, a variant phrasing refers to « intoxicants that cloud the mind and cause carelessness, » implying that its scope is not restricted to beverages, as the traditional formulation suggests, but includes any kind of substance that induces the aforementioned states. Moreover, some commentators have asserted that it also denotes being impassioned by an occurrence or an idea to the degree of being rendered reckless.
The Seven
In the following section, I will offer a brief overview of sin in Christian culture, again as a means of providing examples to help the interested reader debug some of their scripts they suspect might be erroneous.
§
6. Sin in Christian Culture
Death by Numbers
For the purpose of the present document, I will focus only on the Seven Deadly Sins, although the concept of sin in Christianity manifestly covers a broader scope. For example, I could also have elaborated on the Ten Commandments, the Original Sin, and the categories of mortal, venial, and eternal sins.
The deadly sins, or capital sins, are thus called because they are considered to engender other sins and vices. They are typically defined as follows :
Lust : excess in thoughts or desires of a sexual nature.
Gluttony : excess in over-indulgence and over-consumption to the point of waste.
Greed : excess in pursuit of wealth, status, and power.
Sloth : failure to utilize one's talents and gifts.
Wrath : uncontrolled feelings of hatred and anger.
Envy : resentment at another's good fortune.
Pride : excess in love of self at the expense of others – considered the most serious of the seven, and the source of the six others.
[source : Seven Deadly Sins entry in Wikipedia]
Looking Westwards
I find it interesting to note that, when stated as above, the seven capital sins all appear to be articulated around the relationship between self and others. The reflection applies even in the less obvious instances of gluttony and sloth, where the core idea is that one keeps for themselves what could be useful to the community.
From the perspective of one who is familiar with Oriental philosophy, this is evidently evocative of the fundamental poison of ignorance, the belief that the I exists independently of everything else.
In an epoch characterized by an upsurge in individualism, perhaps it is no wonder that our civilization is facing planetary crises, the solutions to which must reside primarily in an improved understanding of our true nature. Possibly, we are collectively off-target by a wide margin.
Looking Backwards
The list has manifestly evolved over time. Although it once was the opposite, in some classifications sloth now includes acedia, which is presented in various manners that suggest melancholy, apathy, discouragement, and dejection.
Similarly, envy was traditionally sorrow, or despair, and then sadness at another's good fortune.
In the Avatamsaka Sutra, one of the most important scriptures of the Buddhist canon, chapter twenty-six is dedicated to the Ten Grounds, that are basically stages on the way to enlightenment. The first is known as the ground of Great Joy, or of Happiness.
These observations further substantiate the notion that hitting the mark is ordinarily accompanied by joyous feelings. In contrast, sorry spirits, which are notorious for attracting disagreeable occurrences, are not only associated with error, but can be regarded as sins in themselves.
Looking Inwards
My experiences of sloth mostly amount to oversleeping when approaching deadlines. In such occasions, it seems best to get in vertical posture as soon as my eyes open, lest the cosmos propose me an aggravating reminder that time is precious later on. In those cases, I also often receive very clear cues from my dreams, that are unusually disturbing and contain hints of events that I would rather remain oblivious to. I figure their purpose is to dissuade me of continuing the horizontal inactivity.
Gluttony for me mostly recalls instances of eating too much or too close to bedtime. As far as I can tell, this tends to engender mind killings without physical component, typically translating into temporary losing sight of the vision that otherwise drives my undertaking.
I find myself guilty of wrath more frequently that I would like to admit. For example, when the tools I consult as navigational aids, such as tarot readings and horoscopes, fail to warn me of upcoming challenges, I'm inclined to express my discontent towards my guardian angels and their superiors. In response, they generally notify me that I'm walking on thin ice. Then, I realize in retrospect that I could have interpreted the predictions differently. On the whole, my history in relation to anger confirms this quote attributed to the Buddha :
« Holding on to anger is like grasping a hot coal with the intent of throwing it at someone else; you are the one who gets burned. »
Looking Onwards
In the context of the creative process, in terms of nurturing the mind, some of the more psychological capital transgressions appear distinctly counterproductive to me.
Envy strikes me as the obvious illustration. The jealous or covetous person focuses on perceived lack, on what they deem to be missing. It is similar to concentrating on distance instead of on destination. How could such a cultivation ever encourage arrivals ?
As always, turning one's attention back to the endeavour provides the most efficacious antidote, or at any rate it does for me.
Thank God It's Friday
As an aside, and at the risk of offering myself as a target for lapidation, I suggest that the worldly career of Jesus Christ might have persisted longer had he upheld Buddhist ethics and refrained from drinking with his buddies at the Last Supper.
So, to the supplication reportedly voiced while on the cross :
« My God, my God, why have you forsaken me ? »
I submit a proper answer would have been :
« Because drinking wine is sin even on Good Friday, my Son. »
Sometimes I Get It Right
Up to this point I have mostly considered the presumably less appreciated dimensions of the question of sin. My reflections on missing the mark, its meaning and its consequences, being now hopefully sufficiently clear, I will propose an examination of the matter of hitting the mark.
§
7. Bullseye
The Error-Free Dynamic
As observed in the third section, the very notion of missing the mark implies that there is a mark to be missed. Or, positively stated, it means that there is a mark to be hit. So, what is hitting the mark, and what does it entail ?
From the alternative views of the day-to-day heaven and of the temporary hell of annoyances, we can deduce that hitting the mark corresponds to performing actions which must not only lead to steady and enjoyable progress towards a chosen goal, but also do so without provoking undesirable repercussions. Indeed, such an experience defines the error-free dynamic.
Thus, in a general sense, pursuing individual objectives without giving rise to adverse effects, present or future, internal or otherwise, is on target. Or perhaps more accurately, any activity that brings one closer to the error-free dynamic and doesn't cause further unsuitable consequences hits the mark. That is to say, when suddenly finding oneself in the underworld, climbing out of there is right on the bullseye too, inasmuch as wrongdoing is avoided while regaining one's ground.
Moreover, we know from the aphorisms regarding the function of mind that hitting the mark equates to nurturing an error-free mind, or at least a gradually less corrupt mind, that will in turn conjure up increasingly sorrowless hereafters, in an ever refining continuum.
The Creative Process
From an artistic standpoint, in general terms, the creative process begins with a dream. A vision of some kind takes shape in the imagination of the artist who then sets out to build a support that will constitute the phenomenal form of the thus fancied entity in their reality. Their work now consists in maintaining their attention on the process as it unfolds. In such a manner, they can iteratively comprehend and discharge the sequence of intentions required to achieve the aim. By sustaining the endeavour in that fashion until consummation, what was originally a mere possibility becomes an actual medium that can be shared in order to convey the initial glimpse and the underlying message to others.
Similarly, in everyday, non-artistic situations, the person architects their own life by focusing on particular outcomes, and then proceeding to accomplish whatever this inspires them to do.
No matter the nature of the quest, artistic or otherwise, related ideations accompany the creative process, hinting at potentialities that the fulfillment of the current undertaking might open up. Taking those cognitions as coming from the faculty via which one can intuit available futures, we can see how, as one advances through the succession of intentions and towards the awaited result, they cultivate the mind that will engender the universe that they will inhabit upon completion of the project. Thus, evidently, as one encounters decisions and changing circumstances in their environment along the way, preserving that mind becomes part of the duties.
In the course of a single day, one might run into numerous occasions for transgression, from misalignment by doubting the validity of the apprehended next step, to the debilitating questioning of the entire enterprise, to less subtle, more tangible misdeeds. Ultimately, it is in how the individual responds at each of those junctures that is established the mind that will produce their following existence. In such a context of constant creation, hitting the mark to avert mind killing is the necessity promising that efforts won't be vain and anticipated fruits will be tasted.
Predestined for Freewill
The issue of the source of the initial visions and of the ensuing intentions that cannot be attributed to reasoning remains debatable. In my view there are basically two perspectives on the topic. Either those inceptions are just inventions and caprices having no exceptional signification beyond one's local sphere, or they are in fact prompted by some sort of higher intelligence that is in position to know the roles the associated materializations will play in the greater whole.
From the pragmatic standpoint of what must be done, whether we ascribe the dreams that drive our pursuits to the master plan of an all-knowing being or simply to our own will isn't much relevant. What is important in the end is not the explication of the provenance of the goals, but rather that they can be attained in an error-free manner. And if so, then doing so is right on target. In other words, the process is the same regardless of the hypothesized origin of the endeavour.
Download this book for your ebook reader.
(Pages 1-32 show above.)