Quote:
|
In a way this is the message of Attar and possibly Sufi - the search is a holy and difficult one, but in the end you will see the answer was before you all the time. All the journey did was open your eyes.
|
Exactly, Philip. Which is why the Buddha famously claimed that "I truly attained nothing from complete, unexcelled enlightenment."
Zen has many tricks (or
upaya) to try and lure the heroic ego into acting on its assumption that it could "attain" to realization through effort and practice. Sufism does this also. But all that is really necessary is for the ego to see through itself. And when it does, there is the understanding that it gained nothing it didn't already have, but had simply failed to see. In other words, the highest religious realization is NOT an accomplishment - it is available at any moment for any person.
The esoteric/exoteric divide has long fascinated me, and it was the essence of my doctoral work.
What I discovered was that the difference between the two levels of understanding is not simply a product of doctrine alone - of choosing between a mystical reading of scriptures or a fundamentalist reading - but that the choice of doctrine expressed a difference in the individual's psychology.
The fundamentalist position involves a need to shore up and protect the ego of the believer, and so literalism (the language of the ego) prevails.
Those individuals capable of seeing through the ego-image identity are more likely to follow mystical readings of the religion, and perceive the "transcendent unity" of all religion.
Unfortunately, there seems to be something like 4-5% of any population capable of ego-transcendence, and so a popular mystical understanding seems unlikely.
The ego-needs of exoteric followers ensure the attitude that "my" religion is the "true" religion, so yours must be "wrong." And this causes all the strife.