Playing with an Idea
May. 7th, 2010 09:39 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
qosSainthood.
It's a loaded word, even for someone like me who has never participated in a tradition which acknowledges saints. And yet it burst into my meditation the other night with strange power as I was reflecting on identity, being, and doing.
I'm usually a stickler for using words with precise meaning whenever possible, but I'm going to ask everyone's indulgence here as I play with the term.
What is a saint?
For me, the first thing that came to mind was a person of "heroic faith" -- someone whose beliefs and their adherence to them are so far beyond what most people are capable of they are ultimate role models.
Beyond that there is an idea of intercession. As I understand it, a saint is someone who, by virtue of their heroic faith, is able to step in and either convince deity to act on behalf of another or perhaps take direct action themselves.
But neither of those concepts is what moved me the other night. Instead, I started thinking of a saint as a person whose life/presence/being is a theophany, a revelation of the divine.
A saint is someone who lives in such deep and constant communion with the divine they become an exceptionally potent channel or marker of Presence, and others can be nurtured, encouraged, uplifted, inspired, given hope simply by being around such a person.
Ultimately, it's not about doing, it's about being. It's not about accomplishing or achieving specific tasks or assignments. It's about living in a connected, open way. I'm certain that from that state of being, doing also happens, and does so in perhaps a remarkable way, but it's not the deeds that are the mark of a saint. It's the divine presence coming through them into the world. Achieving that state may be a result of doing, or it may simply happen by grace, but it's not achieved like a good grade or a project.
I remain convinced that doing is important. Spiritual practices are foundational across all religious traditions for a reason. And we live in a material world where tasks need to be done in order to survive.
But it's a comfort to me to contemplate that place beyond -- or perhaps beside is the better term -- doing that is perhaps even more potent.
In the context of these thoughts, "sainthood" isn't an exalted status conferred on the heroic for above-and-beyond, supernatural spiritual greatness. It's the ability to be so much in communion with the Divine/Spirit that it can't help but flow through the person into the world around them. It can be manifested through doing, but it's more about presence.
None of this is actually a new idea. As I've been typing this, I hear echoes of teachings I've heard from both Christians and Buddhists (and probably others), but it's all striking me in a new way, at this turn of my life when identity and work are central concerns.
How much do I obsess about Doing Things when I could benefit from focusing a bit more on Being With?
This is all still very rough, but it's what's been on my mind these past few days.
It's a loaded word, even for someone like me who has never participated in a tradition which acknowledges saints. And yet it burst into my meditation the other night with strange power as I was reflecting on identity, being, and doing.
I'm usually a stickler for using words with precise meaning whenever possible, but I'm going to ask everyone's indulgence here as I play with the term.
What is a saint?
For me, the first thing that came to mind was a person of "heroic faith" -- someone whose beliefs and their adherence to them are so far beyond what most people are capable of they are ultimate role models.
Beyond that there is an idea of intercession. As I understand it, a saint is someone who, by virtue of their heroic faith, is able to step in and either convince deity to act on behalf of another or perhaps take direct action themselves.
But neither of those concepts is what moved me the other night. Instead, I started thinking of a saint as a person whose life/presence/being is a theophany, a revelation of the divine.
A saint is someone who lives in such deep and constant communion with the divine they become an exceptionally potent channel or marker of Presence, and others can be nurtured, encouraged, uplifted, inspired, given hope simply by being around such a person.
Ultimately, it's not about doing, it's about being. It's not about accomplishing or achieving specific tasks or assignments. It's about living in a connected, open way. I'm certain that from that state of being, doing also happens, and does so in perhaps a remarkable way, but it's not the deeds that are the mark of a saint. It's the divine presence coming through them into the world. Achieving that state may be a result of doing, or it may simply happen by grace, but it's not achieved like a good grade or a project.
I remain convinced that doing is important. Spiritual practices are foundational across all religious traditions for a reason. And we live in a material world where tasks need to be done in order to survive.
But it's a comfort to me to contemplate that place beyond -- or perhaps beside is the better term -- doing that is perhaps even more potent.
In the context of these thoughts, "sainthood" isn't an exalted status conferred on the heroic for above-and-beyond, supernatural spiritual greatness. It's the ability to be so much in communion with the Divine/Spirit that it can't help but flow through the person into the world around them. It can be manifested through doing, but it's more about presence.
None of this is actually a new idea. As I've been typing this, I hear echoes of teachings I've heard from both Christians and Buddhists (and probably others), but it's all striking me in a new way, at this turn of my life when identity and work are central concerns.
How much do I obsess about Doing Things when I could benefit from focusing a bit more on Being With?
This is all still very rough, but it's what's been on my mind these past few days.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 2010-05-07 11:59 pm (UTC)I don't mean this as a critique, but just something to consider, an implication of the being/doing dichotomy you have expanded upon above. One of the things that Christian hagiography often tries to do is show that a saint has been a saint for their entire life, before their ordination, and sometimes even before their official conversion. If it is a matter of being in that manner, then that means that a saint is someone who is on, literally, a whole other order of being, and is a wholly other type of person than the rest of us "mere mortals." If there is nothing one can do to increase one's sanctity and one's closeness to the divine, than those of us who are not the Dalai Lama, certain gurus, and others are pretty much just screwed from the start, because we weren't born as saints, and sanctity isn't intrinsic to our own being. If it is possible for us to go from one state of being to the other, then what causes that, how does it occur--and why?
As a result, I'm pretty favorable to the idea of someone being "awarded" saintly status as a result of their good actions and their demonstrated spiritual prowess (the "above-and-beyond spiritual greatness" you mention above). How else can we recognize someone as a saint other than by what they do? While the presence, ideally, is there amidst the doing, I'm not sure the presence alone is enough: if it is, then it's just good to be sitting next to a saint if you happen to have the chance on the bus on the way to work one day. Sure, we talk about many people who "just make us feel better" to be around them, but I'd wager that 99% of the time, it's because they do something that makes us feel good--they listen well, they smile a lot, they say affirming things, they're respectful in their interactions, etc., all of which are doings, and not just their presentness in being. It's the idea of presence that makes the whole guru culture thrive, in India certainly and increasingly elsewhere as well, and I'm rather critical of that, admittedly.
Again, not a critique, just spinning out a few thoughts on the matter...which are probably not in any way contradictory to your own thoughts, in any case! ;)