1. Introduction Christianity has often been a problem for Theosophists. I think this is largely due to the public face presented by the religion for such a long time – perhaps as long as 1700 years. Almost from its earliest days, Rome-based Christianity became patriarchal and hierarchical. It also became exoteric and literalist. Because of its suppression, the Wisdom Tradition in Christianity is not easy to find today. Many can’t be bothered to look, or even know it exists. However, the search is rewarding and we have been greatly assisted by the discoveries in the 20th century of the Nag Hamadi library (1945), the Dead Sea Scrolls (1947), and other modern research. As a result, in recent times, an increasing number of scholars and Christian writers are recognising what Annie Besant (Esoteric Christianity, 1901) long ago called “the hidden side of Christianity.” I have unashamedly borrowed the title of this talk from a book (The Wisdom Jesus, Shambala, 2008) by Cynthia Bourgeault, an Episcopalian minister, teacher and retreat leader based in Colorado. In addition to her Christian training, she has also studied Gurdjieff, Kabalah, Sufism and Vedanta. Tonight, I will look first at two streams of understanding flowing through Christianity, as explained by Bourgeault. I will then focus on the wisdom stream and how it came to be embraced in the Jesus story. This will entail a quick look at the geographical and social context of the story. Finally, I will select examples of the teachings of Jesus that show he was indeed a Master of Wisdom. 2. Two streams The discovery of early Christian texts at Nag Hamadi in 1945 brought the attention of Western Christians to a tradition that differed from that within which many had grown up. While thoughtful students had always known of the gnosis, or sophia perennis, the average church-goer had for centuries seen Jesus simply as their “saviour” or “redeemer” – “Jesus Saves,” is seen everywhere on church notice boards today. This approach to Jesus is known technically as soteriology. With the Nag Hamadi discovery, things began to change. Ideas that had been lost began to resurface, and thinking Christians, like Bourgeault, realised the existence of another tradition which she calls sophiology, from the Greek sophia meaning wisdom. In the West, soteriology has reigned supreme but the East retained more of the wisdom tradition found in early Christianity. To quote Bourgeault (op cit p21): “Christianity was supremely a wisdom path. For the earliest Christians, Jesus was not the Saviour but the Life-Giver. ... In the original Aramaic of Jesus and his followers, there was no word for salvation. Salvation was understood as a bestowal of life, and to be saved was ‘to be made alive.’ Entering the waters at the hand of John the Baptist, Jesus emerged as Mahyana, ‘the Life Giver.’ He came forth also as the Ihidaya, ‘the Single One’ or ‘the Unified One.’ Nowadays, we would call him ‘the Enlightened One’ ... Jesus’ disciples saw in him a master of consciousness, offering a path through which they, too, could become ihidaya, enlightened ones.” A sophiological Christianity, says Bourgeault (op cit, p21), focuses on the path. It emphasises how Jesus is like us – what he did, we can do. By contrast, soteriology emphasises how different Jesus is from us – “begotten not made, belonging to a higher order of being.” And in this, all the modern evidence, Bourgeault says – including the Nag Hamadi texts (eg the Gospel of Thomas), the Syriac liturgies, the African desert fathers, Celtic poetry and the Chinese Jesus sutras – suggests that it’s the Western Church that “holds the variant position” – it is the heresy – not those who hold to the wisdom tradition. So Jesus is (Bourgeault, op cit p4) “first and foremost ... a wisdom teacher, a person who clearly emerges out of and works within” the sophia perennis. And this tradition, says Bourgeault, “is concerned with the transformation of the whole human being ... from our animal instincts and egocentricity into love and compassion; from a judgmental and dualistic worldview into non-dual acceptingness.” Now all this must sound familiar to many of us. It seems to me that Bourgeault is using Christian theological language to describe what has been known for millennia, in ancient Egypt and Greece, for example, as the Outer and Inner Mysteries. The first included myths and rituals that were common knowledge and at the centre of these was the myth of the dying and resurrecting God-Man. The second, the Inner Mysteries, were esoteric and were known only by those who had undergone a process of initiation, through which they learned the deeper meaning of the rituals and myths. The initiation process, says Freke and Gandy (The Jesus Mysteries, 1999,p4), “brought about personal transformation and spiritual enlightenment,” almost the same words as those just quoted from Bourgeault. So we see that her “two streams” at least run parallel with the Mysteries of the perennial wisdom – the Outer Mysteries (exoteric, literal) being equivalent to her soteriology and the Inner Mysteries (esoteric, allegorical, wisdom) to her sophiology. Before going further, we look briefly at the evidence for Inner Mysteries in Christianity – since average Christians today (including the clergy) seem blissfully unaware of their existence. Or perhaps they are just so familiar that they go unnoticed. 3. The Inner Side of Christianity Annie Besant (op cit p24ff), and other writers before and since, give many references to show the existence of a hidden side to Christian teachings, and I’m sure many here will be familiar with these. I give just a few examples. One of the most obvious is found in Mark 4:10, 11. “When he was alone, those who were around him along with the twelve asked him about the parables. And he said to them, ‘To you has been given the secret of the kingdom of God, but for those outside, everything comes in parables; in order that they may indeed look, but not perceive, and may indeed listen, but not understand...’” I don’t think anyone can doubt the meaning of this. Again in Mark 4:33, we are told quite clearly “With many such parables he spoke the word to them, as they were able to hear it; he did not speak to them except in parables, but he explained everything in private to his disciples.” There are many more such clues “for those who have ears to hear.” There are similar hints in the writings of St Paul. For example, in 1 Corinthians 2:6, 7 Paul says: “...we speak wisdom among them that are perfect; yet not the wisdom of this world ... But we speak the wisdom of God in a mystery, even the hidden wisdom which God ordained before the world... Paul discusses the mysteries and related matters in the whole of chapters 2 and 3 of 1 Corinthians and then in ch4:1 says: “Let a man account us, as of the ministers of Christ, and stewards of the mysteries of God.” As Annie Besant (op cit, p38) asked, “can anyone read these passages ... without recognising the fact that the Apostle possessed a divine wisdom given in Mysteries?” The writings of the early Church Fathers confirm the continuance of the Inner Mysteries of Christianity into their time. In the translation given by Maxwell Staniforth (Early Christian Writings, 1968, p76), Ignatius, Bishop of Antioch, (c35-c107CE) speaks of himself in his Epistle to the Ephesians 3, as “by no means perfect in Jesus Christ .. I am only a beginner in discipleship.” Later (ibid, 12), he tells them “you are initiates of the same mysteries as our saintly and renowned Paul of blessed memory...” St Clement of Alexandria (150-215 CE) speaks of the tradition of Christian gnosticism – the full esoteric knowledge of God and of his revelation in scripture (see Bettenson, The Early Christian Fathers, 1956) – as And of the Christian gnostic he says: “...the growing likeness to God the Father arises in the gnostic ... since he becomes ‘perfect, as the Father in heaven.’” Stromata VI, xii Besant also quotes from the Stromata. Clement says: “The Lord ... allowed us to communicate of those divine Mysteries, and of that holy light, to those who were able to receive them. He did not certainly disclose to the many what did not belong to the many.” And in a later chapter (xii) headed “The Mysteries of the Faith not to be divulged to all,” Clement says that since others than the wise may see his work, “it is requisite therefore to hide in a Mystery the wisdom spoken, which the Son of God taught.” In Origen’s (185-254CE) famous controversy with Celsus, the latter alleged that Christianity was a secret system. Origen responds that, while certain teachings were secret, many others were public, and that this system of exoteric and esoteric teachings, adopted in Christianity were also in general use among philosophers. In his writings, says Annie Besant (op cit, p61), “It is impossible to deny that ... Origen distinctly places the Christian Mysteries in the same category as those of the Pagan world.” Origen also writes at some length about three levels of understanding scripture. And he adds: “... The scriptures ... have not only the meaning which is clear on the surface but another meaning also which is hidden from most people, whereby the narrative presents types of certain mysteries and images of divine matters.” De Principiis, praef 8 And finally, I quote from St Augustine (354-430CE), (Retract 1, xiii, 3); “The identical thing that we now call the christian religion existed among the ancients and has not been lacking from the beginnings of the human race until the coming of Christ in the flesh from which moment the true religion, which already existed, began to be called christian.” So St Augustine, like Origen, places the Christian Mysteries in the same tradition as the ancient Pagan Mysteries, supporting the thesis presented by Freke and Gandy (op cit) and other modern writers. There is much more, but we have seen enough, I think, to show that early Christianity indeed had its Inner Mysteries which derived directly from the ancient Mystery Traditions. In the following centuries, this wisdom was basically stamped out by the increasingly exoteric, literal, Roman Church. It is important to note, however, that Besant, Bourgeault and others are not talking about Gnosticism with a capital “G.” People often glibly talk about “the Gnostics” when the term actually covers a multitude of different groups and ideas. In eliminating certain “extravagances of early Christianity” (see The Statement of Principles and Summary of Doctrine of the Liberal Catholic Church, 2009) – Gnosticism with a capital “G” – the Rome-based church also suppressed the gnosis (small “g”). The baby was thrown out with the bathwater. Let me now look briefly at the geographical and social context of the Jesus story to see where his wisdom teaching came from – note: I am deliberately leaving aside the question of the historicity of Jesus; that’s a talk and a half in itself!! 4. The Palestine of Jesus’ Day – melting pot of wisdom teachings
Now, Herod “saw himself in absolutely every respect as a Hellenistic ruler” (Witherington, Jesus the Sage, 2000, p119). His son, Herod Antipas, became ruler of Galilee during the time of John the Baptist and Jesus. By then, significant Hellenisation had occurred, especially among the upper classes of Jewish society (Witherington, op cit, p121). It is just this more educated group that would have been introduced to the Pagan Mystery traditions (see for example, Tom Harpur, in The Pagan Christ, 2004, pp18, 19; Annie Besant, op cit, p8-10, 25 and others). It is also significant that the immediate setting of the Jesus story is Galilee. Contrary to what one might expect, it wasn’t Jerusalem that was the more Hellenised; it was Galilee, particularly Lower Galilee. Here we find major Greek cities such as Tiberias and Sepphoris, where Greek schools were established. Gadara, scene of the “Gadarene swine” story, was a Greek city. The town of Capernaum, where Jesus is said to have spent a lot of his time, was on a major trade route – part of the Silk Road network that ran through Damascus and down to Egypt (through what is now the Gaza strip). So Capernaum was a cosmopolitan centre of significant population, not just a backwater village. But there is more. Not only would there have been Greek influence but, as Bourgeault points out (op cit, p25), “his [Jesus’] teachings show clear areas of overlap with the great stream of sophia perennis flowing through other spiritual traditions, particularly Buddhism and Persian light mysticism” (by which I think she means Mithraism). Doubtless wisdom influences flowed up the coastal trade route from Egypt too. Now all these ideas were piled on top of the long-existing indigenous Jewish Wisdom Tradition (see my article “Wisdom in the Judaeo-Christian Tradition,” The Liberal Catholic, Vol 71 (2), p31). The influence of writers such as Ben Sira, for example, author of Ecclesiasticus or Sirach (ca 180BCE) is noticeable in the Gospels Matthew and Luke (Witherington, op cit, p143ff). So Jesus would have been exposed to wisdom traditions from many sources. Furthermore, as Bourgeault says (op cit pp25-27), “Jesus was not a hick.” From the Gospels we know he could read, he probably spoke several languages, and may well have trained with the Essene Community at Qumran. She concludes: “He was not only a teacher of wisdom; he was a master of wisdom.” So, in the final section of my talk this evening, let’s look at some of Jesus’ teachings. 5. The Wisdom Teachings of Jesus Again, I will take a few points from Bourgeault’s book, The Wisdom Jesus. a) Jesus makes frequent reference to “the Kingdom of Heaven.” It’s “like this” or “like that;” it’s “at hand” or “within you.” But where is it exactly? It obviously isn’t up in the sky somewhere – space research pretty much dispensed with any notion like that. Another angle people have taken is that it’s some kind of earthly utopia that will eventuate when we have peace, love and justice on earth and all will live together in harmony. But Jesus distinctly said “My kingdom is not of this world” (John 18:36). To get to the point, Bourgeault (op cit, p30) says, as others have done, that the Kingdom of Heaven is “a metaphor for a state of consciousness” – it’s not a place at all. It’s Jesus’ way of describing a state we would nowadays call “non-dual consciousness” or “unitive consciousness.” It is a state of non-separation between God and humans, and humans and humans. Bourgeault believes that what Jesus has in mind “is a complete, mutual indwelling: I am in God, God is in you, you are in God, we are in each other.” So Jesus teaches the existence of a higher state of consciousness wherein is realised the Oneness of all life. b) The second point is related to this. As Bourgeault says (op cit, p37): “You’ll often hear ... that [Jesus] came to this earth calling us to repentance.” Again, signs outside churches proclaim “repent, for the day of the Lord is at hand” or some such dire warning. The Greek word being translated as “repentance” is metanoia which doesn’t mean feeling sorry for doing naughty things. It doesn’t even mean ‘to change direction’ or ‘to mend your ways.’ Says Bourgeault “The word literally breaks down into meta and noia, which means ... “beyond the mind” or “into the larger mind” depending on how you translate meta. So Jesus really is telling us to go beyond the false self, the little ego, into the higher Self. He is calling us to personal transformation. Isn’t that what the spiritual journey is all about? [Bourgeault describes these levels of consciousness beautifully. The false self she calls “the egoic operating system.” She says this is a binary system operating with dualities like either/or – it’s centred in the brain. It loves to separate things – us and them, or God and us. The higher unitive Self she calls “a nondual or unitive system” and it’s centred in the heart. “In Wisdom, the heart is primarily an organ of spiritual perception,” she says (op cit, p35). Someone who is able “to see with the eye of the heart” “is operating out of nondual consciousness – they see “from the perspective of singleness ... and there is now no separation...” (op cit, p36-37).] With this in mind, let’s look at more of the teachings of Jesus. c) Among the best known Biblical passages are the verses in Matthew 5:1-12, known as the Beatitudes (they all start with “Blessed are...). Bourgeault goes through all of these, looking at them with “the eye of the heart.” She notes that these are also “the least commented upon by the church fathers and theologians – most likely ... because they are clearly nondual teachings of the highest order, and most of the church still isn’t there yet” (op cit, p42). I choose just one, because it brings out an example of the misunderstanding that has been perpetrated throughout most of Church history. “Blessed are the pure in heart, for they will see God.” For most church goers, being “pure in heart” means being virtuous and having no sinful thoughts, particularly of a sexual nature. So if we live a “good clean life” we’ll get to heaven. But, Bourgeault points out, “in wisdom teaching, purity means singleness, and the proper translation of this beatitude is ... ‘Blessed are those whose heart is not divided’ or ‘whose heart is a unified whole.’” The meaning then becomes clear, that those who achieve nondual vision will indeed “see God.” We mentioned earlier the (Aramaic) word ihidaya, “the single one” who has unified his or her being. Not only has the beatitude been misunderstood, but this word has been interpreted as supporting priestly celibacy! d) Let’s have a quick look at the Parables. These are not just stories with a moral – that would be a proverb or an Aesop’s Fable. Jesus’ parables are more like Zen koans, says Bourgeault (op cit p47) – “profound paradoxes that are intended to turn the egoic mind upside down and push us into new ways of seeing things.” Think of the wise and foolish bridesmaids, waiting for the bridegroom to come (Matthew 25). You probably remember the story. The Groom is delayed and they all fall asleep. In the middle of the night, they hear the cry “The bridegroom is coming!” Five of them had remembered to bring enough oil for their lamps, the other five didn’t have enough oil and they’d run out. They ask the five wise ones if they could borrow some of theirs, but the five wise ones refuse: “If we give you some of our oil, there won’t be enough for any of us. Go and buy your own.” Sounds really unkind, doesn’t it? A number of Jesus’ parables leave the egoic mind thinking “That isn’t fair!” or “That isn’t very nice!” But, of course, the oil here symbolises something that has to be brought to birth in each individual for themselves – the transformed consciousness. Nobody else can do this for you – it’s solely down to you. e) The Gospel of Thomas is one of the best known texts from the Nag Hamadi corpus. Scholars have taken the date back and back as their studies have progressed and many now think it predates the earliest canonical Gospel of St Mark. That is, Thomas is earlier than 70BCE. It consists of 114 short sayings (logia) of Jesus. They emphasise the unification of consciousness. But, says Bourgeault (op cit, p55) “whoever transcribed them was certainly one of his [Jesus’] advanced students.” I have time here for only a couple of short examples. Logion 7 reads: Blessed is the lion whom the man devours, for that lion will become man. But cursed is the man whom the lion devours, for that man shall become lion.” This relates to the need for us to tame or overcome our “animal” nature. The man who devours the lion has his animal nature, or lower nature, under control. He is progressing on the spiritual journey. But the reverse, if the lion devours the man, means that the animal instincts win out. In that case, says Bourgeault (op cit, p56), the person actually devolves into a lower form. [Refer if time to the Rumi poem]. Logion 42 reads: “Come into being as you pass away.” This is the shortest of the sayings and its meaning is clear. From the point of view of the lower realm, we die as we pass into the higher. It‘s similar to Jesus’ saying in Matthew 10:39: “He that findeth his life shall lose it, and he that loseth his life for my sake shall find it.” f) Finally, returning to the canonical Gospels, I should mention the I AM sayings of Jesus, mainly found in the Gospel of John. The one I bring to your attention here is the one which Christian fundamentalists love to throw at me. In John 14:6, answering a question from Thomas, Jesus says: I am the way, the truth and the life: no man cometh unto the Father but by me. And, of course, all the exoteric literalists immediately conclude that to get to heaven we have to be good Christian followers of Jesus. There are no other paths to God – Christianity is it. Obviously this is not what Jesus, the master of wisdom, intended. In the Judaic tradition, I AM is the holy name of God, Yahweh. So again Jesus was speaking from that unitive level of consciousness, the Christ consciousness. And of course we have to raise our awareness to that state before we can encounter the Divine. In Hindu terms, Jesus is saying” no-one comes to Brahman except via the atman.” Other I AM sayings have a similar interpretation. 6. Concluding remarks In concluding, I would like to note that leading early Theosophists envisioned a Western church in which a knowledge and understanding of the Wisdom Tradition would be restored. Annie Besant wrote (op cit, p27) “If it is to live [that is, the Christian Church], it must regain the knowledge it has lost, and again have its mystic and its occult teachings; it must again stand forth as an authoritative teacher of spiritual verities, clothed with the only authority worth anything, the authority of knowledge.” And she is using “knowledge” in the sense of “gnosis,” of course. This concern was the impetus, I think, behind the establishing of the Liberal Catholic Church. We find the wisdom approach to Christianity in the writings of CW Leadbeater, JI Wedgwood, Annie Besant and later Geoffrey Hodson, among a number of others. Hodson, among his many works, wrote The Hidden Wisdom in the Holy Bible, and The Christ Life from Nativity to Ascension. In both these volumes, Hodson goes into the allegorical or hidden meaning of the scriptures in great detail. But time is running out and I must close. There is so much more I could have covered, but I hope I have given you a glimpse of Jesus as a Master of Wisdom. One final comment; it seems to me that the history of Christianity is a real tragedy. As Bourgeault says (op cit, p76) “The gospels record a comical but poignant trail of miscomprehensions and botched efforts to follow the Master’s lead ... In a real sense, Christianity as a religion got off on the wrong foot from the start.” And look at all the wars, persecutions and atrocities that have been perpetrated as a result! My own thought – it seems to me this is a classic example of what happens when the Inner Mysteries get into the hands of those not able to understand them. Jesus the Master himself warned his disciples (Matthew 7:6) Give not that which is holy unto the dogs, neither cast ye your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn again and rend you.”
|
>Writings index |