TERRORISM, DISSOCIATION, AND SPIRITUAL ABUSE Part 2 of 4

(Continued from Yesterday's Blog Entry)


The term “jihad” has been bandied about by both Muslims and non-Muslims. Oftentimes, individuals from both of these groups (e.g., fundamentalists of all stripes tend to use words in ways which best express their dogmatic interests) have sought to exploit this word by means of delusional systems which are intended to serve something other than the truth.

In Arabic, jihad is a verbal noun which conveys a sense of striving, struggle, or determined effort. Quite frequently in the Qur’an, the term jihad is followed by the words fi sabil Illah which means: in the way, path, or cause of Allah.

If the ‘way’, ‘path’, or ‘cause’ of Allah were meant to be violent, God wasted an awful lot of time with the thousands of other verses of the Qur’an which explore issues that are far removed from matters of armed conflict. If the ‘way’, ‘path’ or ‘cause’ of Allah were meant to be violent and oppressive (as so many fundamentalists seem to suppose), then, one can’t help but wonder why the Qur’an spends so much time talking about the importance of qualities such as patience, forgiveness, peace, tolerance, kindness, integrity, equitability, charitableness, honesty, modesty, and love.

Mujahid is the active participle of the underlying root and refers to someone who strives, struggles, or makes a determined effort. A mujahid, therefore, is someone who participates in jihad, broadly construed -- which is to say: activities that encompass a wide variety of modes of struggle, striving, and making a determined effort.

In Arabic there are terms which give expression to the idea of armed conflict much more directly, and less ambiguously, than does the word jihad. For instance, both ‘harb’ and ‘qital’ refer to the act of waging war, and, yet, the more ambiguous and nuanced term “jihad” is the word around which discussion revolves.

Those Muslims who are prone to violent solutions to problems don’t say: “Let’s declare ‘harb’ or let’s declare ‘qital’”. They say “We are declaring jihad” because the term “jihad” has a noble spiritual currency in Islam which war-mongers frequently wish to leverage for purposes other than the ‘cause’, or ‘path’ or ‘way’ of Allah.

Under the appropriate circumstances, harb or qital may be subsumed under, or encompassed by, the idea of jihad. However, not all forms of jihad will necessarily be expressed through the waging of armed conflict.

The Prophet (peace be upon him) is reported to have said that ‘one performs the best jihad when one stands up and speaks out against injustice in the face of tyranny and oppression’. Moreover, when asked by A’isha (may Allah be pleased with her) about whether women should be participating in the armed conflict which was taking place, Muhammad (peace be upon him) is reported to have said: ‘The best and the most superior Jihad is the Hajj (pilgrimage) which is accepted by Allah’.

Some people claim that the latter saying of the Prophet applies only to women. However, the people who make such an allegation have absolutely no evidential proof concerning what the intention and frame of mind of the Prophet was at the time he is reported to have made the statements about the Hajj which is accepted by God as being the most superior form of jihad. Moreover, those who seek to argue that the foregoing reported words of the Prophet were intended only for women seem to forget that the Prophet accepted the pledge of fidelity, support, and willingness to die in the way of Allah, which was given at Hudaibiyah in 6 A.H., from both women and men.

At the very least, the Prophet’s statement to A’isha demonstrates that jihad can mean something besides armed conflict. In other words, in the foregoing hadith (a saying or tradition which is attributed to the Prophet), Muhammad (peace be upon him) is reportedly using the term jihad to refer to a form of striving and struggle which is other than armed conflict, and, therefore, anyone who wishes to reduce jihad to being nothing more than a synonym for waging war is contradicted by such sayings of the Prophet.

There is also another saying attributed to the Prophet which makes a distinction between the lesser jihad (al-jihad al-asghar) and the greater jihad (al-jihad al-akbar). More specifically, according to this tradition, the Prophet was returning from a physical battle against those who were seeking to oppress, if not destroy, Muslims. The Prophet indicated to those with him that they were going from the lesser jihad to the greater jihad, and when someone asked about what the Prophet meant, the Prophet explained that the physical battle was the lesser jihad and the struggle against one’s inner, carnal soul was the greater jihad.

The foregoing tradition does not appear in any of the major compilations of Hadith. However, this fact, in and of itself, means little more than that the methods used by those who compiled hadiths did not capture or yield the foregoing saying.

In other words, one needs to understand that any given collection of hadiths does not encompass everything which the Prophet actually said but, rather, includes only those sayings or traditions which are considered to be authentic sayings based on the methodology used to collect such sayings. There may be many things which the Prophet said which do not appear in a given compilation of hadiths simply because such sayings either fell outside the reach of those methods or because those methods did not recognize such sayings as being authentic.

The Prophet (peace be upon him) may, or may not, have said the above tradition about the distinction between the greater and lesser jihad. All that can be said is that none of the major sets of compilations contains the aforementioned hadith, but, nevertheless, the hadith is accepted as authentic by many Sufi shaykhs who are well versed in the methodology of hadith compilation, and despite knowing that the above tradition does not appear in any of the major collections, nonetheless, the tradition is accepted by them as authentic.

In order to motivate would-be terrorist candidates, modern-day jihadist extremists like to speak about jihad in terms of its being the most virtuous deed one can perform. They site hadiths such as the following which is narrated by Abu Huraira (may Allah have mercy on his soul) in Volume One of Bukhari:

“A man came to Allah's Apostle (peace be upon him) and
said "Instruct me as to such a deed as equals Jihad
(in reward)." The Prophet (peace be upon him) replied,
"I do not find such a deed." Then he added, "While
the Muslim fighter is in the battlefield, can you
enter your place of worship to perform prayers without
cease and fast and never break your fast?" The man
said, "But who can do that?" Abu Huraira (may Allah
have mercy on his soul) added, "The Mujahid (i.e.
the person participating in jihad) is rewarded even
for the footsteps of his horse while it wanders about
(for grazing) tied on a long rope".

In another hadith which is narrated by Abu Said
Khudri (may Allah be pleased with him), somebody
asked, "O Allah's Messenger (peace be upon him)!
Who is the best among the people?" Allah's
Messenger (peace be upon him) replied, "A
believer who performs Jihad with his life
and wealth."

The latter hadith is more general than the former hadith. More specifically, the latter hadith does not mention battlefields or armed conflict, and, consequently, leaves open the possibility that the Prophet (peace be upon him) may have been speaking about jihad in a more inclusive sense, encompassing an array of different kinds of striving which were not restricted just to armed conflict.

The Qur’an indicates that:

“Allah has preferred in grades those who strive hard with their wealth and lives above those who sit (at home). Unto each, Allah has promised salvation, but Allah has preferred those who strive hard above those who sit (at home) by a huge reward." (4: 95).

In the foregoing verse, the Qur’an is clear that those who strive hard with their wealth and lives are preferred above those who merely sit at home and do not use their wealth and lives to struggle in the way of Allah. Nevertheless, it is important to note that the Qur’an also indicates that those who do not strive hard with their wealth and lives are not necessarily condemned thereby but, rather, if they seek to submit in other ways, are promised salvation by God.

In addition, once again, the wording of the Qur’an leaves open the possibility that a broader form of striving is being indicated than just armed conflict. Unfortunately, those individuals who are inclined toward violence often like to interpret the Qur’an according to their own violent inclinations, and they use their predilections to mislead (and, therefore, spiritually abuse) people who are vulnerable while in a state of dissociation and who are, therefore, desperately trying to seek release from their internal turmoil and pain.

More specifically, if someone feels lost, alone, alienated, scattered, hopeless, and without a sense of purpose or identity (i.e., they are in a state of dissociation), and, then, someone comes along and says I know a way for you to have purpose, meaningful identity, hope, a sense of belonging, and focus, then, naturally, the former individual is likely to express some degree of interest in such a ‘solution’. If the person in a condition of dissociation hears, as well, that the aforementioned solution to one’s problems is also the most virtuous deed in the sight of God and that this claim can be proved through verses of the Qur’an as well as through words which the Prophet, himself, has uttered, it is very difficult for a Muslim who is in a dissociated condition not to be very intrigued with such possibilities.

Understanding the foregoing motivational dynamics, ‘leaders’ who are prone to violence and are in need of foot-soldiers for their own agenda will actively troll the waters of society for those individuals who are in a dissociated state and, therefore, who are very vulnerable to anything which appears to offer an escape from their personal, emotional, and spiritual problems. The elements of doing violence to others and sacrificing one’s own life will be introduced at a time, and in a context, when the ‘candidate’ for terrorist acts is likely to be most receptive to the ‘pitch’ which is intended to close the deal which converts someone into a once and future terrorist.

It is interesting that none of the foregoing hadiths or verses of the Qur’an which have been mentioned in the last several pages use the words ‘harb’ or ‘qital’(that is, the Arabic words which unambiguously give expression to waging war and armed conflict). No one, apparently, came to the Prophet and asked him: “Show me a deed that is the equal to ‘harb’ or ‘qital’. Furthermore, the Prophet did not say that he knew of no deed which was the equal of ‘harb’ or ‘qital’.

Moreover, the Qur’an did not say that Allah prefers, by degrees, those who engage in ‘harb’ and ‘qital’ over those who sit at home. Striving with one’s life and wealth can be done in many different ways other than by engaging in armed conflict, and, yet, fundamentalist extremists who are inclined toward violence wish to restrict the meaning of jihad to being only about armed conflict.

Even with respect to the issue of whether, or not, jihad is the most virtuous deed, there are hadiths which indicate that jihad -- independently of how it is understood -- is not necessarily the most virtuous of deeds which a Muslim can perform. For instance, in Volume 1, Book 10, Number 505 of Bukhari, one finds the following tradition which is narrated by 'Abdullah:

“I asked the Prophet "Which deed is the dearest to Allah?" He
replied, "To offer the prayers at their early stated fixed times."
I asked, "What is the next (in goodness)?" He replied, "To be
good and dutiful to your parents". I again asked, "What is the
next (in goodness)?" He replied, 'To participate in Jihad
(spiritual struggle) in Allah's cause."

A variation of the foregoing hadith is reported by Abu Huraira (may Allah have mercy on his soul) in Volume 1, Book 2, Number 25 of Bukhari:

Allah's Apostle (peace be upon him) was asked, "What is the
best deed?" He replied, "To believe in Allah and His Apostle
(Muhammad). The questioner then asked, "What is the next
(in goodness)? The Prophet (peace be upon him) replied,
"To participate in Jihad (religious fighting) in Allah's
Cause." The questioner again asked, "What is the next (in
goodness)?" He replied, "To perform Hajj 'Mubrur, (that
pilgrimage which is accepted by Allah and which is
performed with the intention of seeking only Allah's
pleasure)."

In Volume 2, Book 15, Number 86 of Bukhari collection of hadiths, Ibn Abbas (may Allah be pleased with him) narrates the following:

“The Prophet said, "No good deeds done on other days
are superior to those done on these (first ten days of
Dhul Hijja)." Then some companions of the Prophet
said, "Not even Jihad?" He replied, "Not even Jihad,
except that of a man who does it by putting himself
and his property in danger (for Allah's sake) and
does not return with any of those things."

Finally, in another hadith, the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) is reported to have said:

“There is a polish for everything which takes away
the rust of that which is polished, and the polish
for the heart is the remembrance of God (zikr).

One of the Companions said: “Is not repelling the
infidel like this?” Muhammad (peace be upon him)
said: “No! Even if one fights until one’s sword
is broken.”

In each of the aforementioned hadiths, there are deeds that are being described which, contrary to the proclamation of modern-day jihadists, are better or superior to that of jihad. Moreover, the one exception to the foregoing statement concerns the sort of jihad in which a person places his or her own life and wealth at risk and, then, both dies and loses one’s wealth in the process.

Nonetheless, even in the latter instance, the emphasis is on risking and losing one’s life and wealth rather than on killing others. Modern-day extremist jihadists seek to conflate and confuse the two (that is, willingness to give one’s life and killing others), but the two are not the same.

Indeed, there is another reported hadith which underlies the foregoing emphasis of sacrificing one’s life rather than on the taking of the lives of others. More specifically:

Book 21, Number 21.14.33:

“Yahya related to me from Malik that Yahya ibn Said said,
"The Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him
peace, was sitting by a grave which was being dug at Madina.
A man looked into the grave and said, 'A terrible bed for
a believer. 'The Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him
and grant him peace, said, 'Terrible? What you have said
is absolutely wrong.' The man said to the Prophet, 'I
didn't mean that, Messenger of Allah. I meant being
killed in the way of Allah.' The Messenger of Allah,
may Allah bless him and grant him peace, said, 'Being
killed in the way of Allah has no like!”

The Prophet (peace be upon him) did not say that killing in the way of Allah has no like. He said being killed in the way of Allah has no like.

If one speaks out against tyranny (a form of jihad) and dies in the process, then, according to the foregoing hadith, this is an act which has no like. If one goes on a Hajj that is accepted by Allah (another form of jihad) and dies along the way, then, this kind of action is one of the things for which there are no other non-jihad oriented activities that can compare. If one strives with all one’s life and wealth against one’s own carnal soul (a further form of jihad -- the greater jihad according to authentic Sufi shaykhs), then, this is a form of activity with which non-jihad activities cannot compare.

As indicated previously, on certain occasions, the Prophet (peace be upon him) said that such and such was superior to jihad, while, on other occasions, he seemed to indicate that jihad was superior to all other kinds of activities. When juxtaposed next to one another, some people may be inclined to consider such traditions to be contradictory.

However, the Prophet is reported to have counseled people to speak with others according to the level of understanding of those with whom one was speaking. Consequently, quite plausibly, depending on circumstances, audience, and the Prophet’s own spiritual state at the time of a given discussion, the Prophet may have emphasized certain actions at some junctures to certain people, while emphasizing other actions at certain junctures to people of a different level of understanding or who had a different set of needs to be addressed which took priority under a different set of circumstances.

All of the guidance was valid, and all of the teachings, when properly delineated, could be reconciled with one another. However, how the spiritual material was presented, as well as what kind of emphasis would be given to such material, might vary from situation to situation and from person to person.

For example, during Hajj, different people came to the Prophet and indicated they had performed the various rites of pilgrimage in a certain sequence. They were seeking assurances from the Prophet that what they had done was correct.

The sequence of steps observed by these individuals was different in a number of instances. Yet, the Prophet is reported to have indicated that all such sequences were acceptable.

Similarly, there was a time when one of the Companions heard someone reciting the Qur’an in a way which was different from the way in which he recited the Qur’an. Since the latter individual had learned to recite from the Prophet, he took exception with that manner of reciting the Qur’an which differed from his.

They both went to the Prophet in order to discuss the situation. After providing demonstrations of their respective modes of reciting the Qur’an, they were informed that both styles of Quranic recitation were correct, and, in fact, there were seven different major modes of reciting the Qur’an, along with a larger number of minor variations, all of which were acceptable.

Consequently, just because different people may understand something in a variety of ways does not necessarily mean, in, and of itself, that all such understandings can’t simultaneously be true. Truth may admit to a variety of degrees of freedom, and unfortunately, God’s truth tends to be far more expansive than is the willingness of people who insist on making truth conform to their narrow, inflexible, dogmatic, limited, and, quite frequently, error-riddled conceptions of that truth.

Notwithstanding all of the foregoing considerations, one should try to keep certain factors in mind when thinking about hadiths of any kind. First of all, and quite ironically, there are hadiths which indicate that the Prophet did not approve of people making compilations of his sayings, and, as well, there are hadiths which indicate that on a number of different occasions the Prophet had such collections brought to him and destroyed.

Ibn Saeed Al-Khudry reported that Prophet Muhammad said:

"Do not write anything from me except Qur’an. Anyone who
wrote anything other than the Quran shall erase it."

In another tradition, some thirty years after the Prophet had
passed away, Zayd Ibn Thabit, a close companion of the Prophet,
visited the Khalifa Mu'aawiyah and related a story about the
Prophet which Mu'aawiyah liked. Mu’aawiyah ordered someone to
write the story down. But Zayd said: "the messenger of God
ordered us never to write down anything of his hadith."

In another tradition narrated by Abu Huraira, the messenger
of God was informed that some people are writing his hadiths.
The Prophet took to the pulpit of the mosque and said, "What
are these books that I heard you wrote? I am just a human
being. Anyone who has any of these writings should bring it
here.” Abu Huraira said we collected all these writings and
burned them.”

Abu Bakr Siddiq (may Allah be pleased with) had a collection of some 500 hadiths of the Prophet. However, after hearing from the Prophet (peace be upon him) about the dire consequences which might befall anyone who perpetrated untruths concerning what the Prophet said, this close Companion of the Prophet burned his collection of sayings after spending the night struggling over the issue of whether, or not, to retain his set of traditions.

Hazrat ‘Umar and Bibi A’isha (may Allah be pleased with them both) each had disagreements over the accuracy and authenticity of a variety of hadiths which had been collected and related by Abu Huraira (may Allah have mercy on him). Abu Huraira (may Allah be pleased with him) was among the first to begin compiling a collection of alleged Prophetic sayings and who, despite only being in the company of the Prophet for a few years had, apparently, collected thousands of hadiths more than people who had spent decades in the company of the Prophet.

During the time when Hazrat ‘Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) was Caliph, he directed Abu Huraira (may Allah have mercy on his soul) to stop reporting hadiths to others as a result of these disagreements concerning the extent of the authenticity and accuracy of some of the traditions being reported by the latter individual. Abu Huraira (may Allah have mercy on his soul) complied with this directive until after Hazrat ‘Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) was assassinated, at which point Abu Huraira (may Allah have mercy on his soul) began, again, to promulgate his collection of hadiths

In another context, Caliph, Hazrat ‘Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) appointed Abu Huraira (may Allah have mercy on his soul) to be governor of a certain region. However, after a time, the Caliph recalled his governor and asked him to explain how someone who had assumed such a position with no money had accumulated so much money in such a short period of time and required his governor to turn over a substantial portion of the money which the governor had accumulated during his tenure.

One of the conditions or requirements devised by later traditionalists, such as Bukhari and his student, Muslim, for determining which hadiths were to be accepted as authentic and which ones were to be rejected revolved about the moral character of the individuals who were part of the isnad, or chain of transmission, for a given saying. Without wishing to pass any final judgment about the quality of the character of Abu Huraira (may Allah have mercy upon his soul), nonetheless, the foregoing discussion concerning disagreements about whether, or not, Abu Huraira (may Allah have mercy on his soul) was reporting Prophetic sayings accurately and whether, or not, he had conducted himself with integrity when a governor during the Caliphacy of Hazrat ‘Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) tend to raise the sorts of question which might have disqualified Abu Huraira (may Allah have mercy on his soul) as a reliable source of hadiths. However, this is not the case, and, as a result, one finds many sayings among the major collections of hadith that are attributed to the Prophet, yet which are traced back to Abu Huraira (may Allah have mercy upon his soul) as the primary narrator.

In addition to the foregoing considerations, one might also reflect upon the following facts. Muslim, who was a student of Bukhari and who became a prominent compiler of hadiths in his own right (and both of these compilers of traditions began their work several hundred years after the Prophet had passed away), rejected more than four hundred of the hadiths which his mentor considered to be authentic, while Bukhari rejected some 4-500 hadiths which his student, Muslim, considered to be authentic.

None of the compilers of hadith are the Prophet (peace be upon him), and none of the compilers of hadith are the Qur’an. Even when what is reported by compilers of tradition are authentic and accurate, these compilations do not necessarily provide any clues about the intention with which the Prophet said such things, or toward what kind of an audience (whether restricted or general) instruction was being directed by the Prophet, or what the meaning was of what the Prophet may have said.

The foregoing comments are not intended to demonstrate that there is no such thing as an authentic hadith of the Prophet. Rather, the previous discussion is meant to induce a certain amount of caution when thinking about reported hadiths and whether, or not, and the extent to which, one believes that such hadiths ought to govern one’s life -- this is especially the case in situations where one is being told that killing other people or doing violence to other people is the greatest virtue a Muslim can perform -- which many fundamentalist, extremist, jihadist leaders attempt to claim.

Whatever one’s views may be with respect to the authenticity of this or that hadith, the foregoing demonstrates that would-be terrorist leaders can site the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) as a authority for terrorist activities only by either completely ignoring hadiths which contradict their point of view, and/or selectively interpreting the traditions of the Prophet, and/or failing to consider individual hadiths against a far larger backdrop of teachings from the hadith and Qur’an which are intended to place limits on, as well as modulate in various ways, traditions which are being removed from, or considered independently of, a much larger context of spiritual guidance.

As a result, vulnerable people -- that is, those who often are in dissociative states and are seeking solutions for the pain, stress, doubt, anxiety, fear and so on of felt dissociation -- are not permitted by terrorist ‘leaders’ to explore all sides of a spiritual issue. Instead, these spiritually abusive ‘leaders’ present only that information which usually has been reframed, or deliberately distorted, or taken out of context and, therefore, removed from the limiting influence of other kinds of spiritual values and teachings which also should be taken into consideration before any decision is reached in a given matter -- for example, whether to commit violence against others.

In addition to the foregoing sorts of consideration, there are some individuals who -- lacking in tools of faith and, as a result, are inclined to resort to tools of violence as a way of ‘settling’ matters –- these individuals seek to frame the situation in ways that ‘help’ identify those people who should be the ‘rightful’ objects of their violence. For instance, there are some Muslims who have divided up the world into Dar al-Islam (the Abode of Islam) and Dar al-Harb (the Abode of War). Some of these same Muslims have further subdivided Dar al-Harb into People of the Book and polytheists.

Although both the Prophet and the Qur’an do speak about Muslims, people of the Book, and polytheists, neither the Prophet nor the Qur’an speaks in terms of Dar al-Islam and Dar al-Harb. These are concepts developed by theologians, jurists, philosophers, and others who arose after the Prophet passed away and who were advancing their own theoretical hermeneutics concerning their understanding of things.

The fact of the matter is there are parts of the Muslim world which are engaged in harb, while there are parts of the non-Muslim world which are not so engaged. If Dar al-Harb is meant to refer to those parts of the world which at war with faith, then, there are times when some Muslims should, themselves, be included in Dar al-Harb, just as there are times when the peace and submission to God which prevails in some non-Muslim communities would render them to be part of Dar al-Islam.

Furthermore, there is prima facie evidence from the Qur’an that placing People of the Book within Dar al-Harb is actually a mistake. For example, in the Qur’an, one finds the following verses:

[2:62] “Surely, those who believe, those who are Jewish, the Christians, and the converts; anyone who (1) believes in Allah, and (2) believes in the Last Day, and (3) leads a righteous life, will receive their recompense from their Lord. They have nothing to fear, nor will they grieve.”

[5:69] “Surely, those who believe, those who are Jewish, the converts, and the Christians; any of them who (1) believe in Allah and (2) believe in the Last Day, and (3) lead a righteous life, have nothing to fear, nor will they grieve.”

In addition, one also finds the following verses in different parts of the Qur’an:

[2:136] “Say, "We believe in Allah, and in what was sent down to us, and in what was sent down to Abraham, Ismail, Isaac, Jacob, and the Patriarchs; and in what was given to Moses and Jesus, and all the prophets from their Lord. We make no distinction among any of them. To Him alone we are submitters."

[2:285] “The messenger has believed in what was sent down to him from his Lord, and so did the believers. They believe in Allah, His angels, His scripture, and His messengers: "We make no distinction among any of His messengers." They say, "We hear, and we obey. Forgive us, our Lord. To You is the ultimate destiny."

[3:84] Say, "We believe in Allah, and in what was sent down to us, and in what was sent down to Abraham, Ismail, Isaac, Jacob, and the Patriarchs, and in what was given to Moses, Jesus, and the prophets from their Lord. We make no distinction among any of them. To Him alone we are submitters."

[4:150] Those who disbelieve in Allah and His messengers, and seek to make distinction among Allah and His messengers, and say, "We believe in some and reject some," and wish to follow a path in between;

[4:151] these are the real disbelievers. We have prepared for the disbelievers a shameful retribution.”

To claim that People of the Book, Jews, Christians, converts, or anyone who believes in God, and in the Last Day, and seeks to do righteous works are not members of Dar al-Islam seems, at the very least, a problematic notion. Moreover, to try to claim that distinctions should be made among the Prophets in the sense that the followers of some should be assigned to Dar al-Islam and the followers of others should be assigned to Dar al-Harb is inconsistent with what the foregoing verses of the Qur’an are directing Muslims to do and, in fact, is precisely the sort of thing about which the Qur’an is seeking to warn believers to avoid in 4: 150-151, noted above. Finally, to use such terms as ‘harbis’ with respect to people who do believe in God and the Last Day, and who seek to do righteous works -- and, therefore, actually are, from the perspective of the Qur’an, among those who, according to their understanding, submit to God -- seems arbitrary, arrogant, presumptuous, lacking in humility, and unjustifiably discriminatory.

(To be continued tomorrow, God Willing)

Anab Whitehouse

TERRORISM, DISSOCIATION, AND SPIRITUAL ABUSE Part 1 of 4

You may be asking yourself the question of why you should read something which sounds as academic and ‘heavy/intense’ as the foregoing title might seem to suggest.

The shorter answer to such a question is that ignorance is a weapon which is wielded by many sides of the terrorist issue in order to hide the truth about various facets of the phenomenology and dynamics of terrorism and spiritual abuse.

People who are ignorant are that much more vulnerable to being manipulated and exploited by those who use terrorism (irrespective of their ‘side’ on the matter) to promote tools of violence as the way to solve problems rather than promoting tools of faith as the best way to engage most of the difficulties facing human beings. Ignorance is not bliss but is, in fact, one of the major causes of the perpetuation of the terrorist phenomenon, and those who perpetuate terrorism include not just terrorist groups but those who believe they can conduct a successful war on terrorism, along with those who blindly support either side.

All three of the foregoing elements (terrorists, those who conduct violent, oppressive campaigns against terrorists, and those who blindly follow either of these approaches) in the terrorist equation are steeped in ignorance of one kind or another. The following article seeks to critically examine some of the phenomenology and dynamics surrounding terrorist activity in the hope that insight rather than ignorance may inform a person’s understanding of this matter.

In a previous chapter (‘Fate Worse Than Death’) some of the dynamics of dissociation were explored in connection with the issue of spiritual abuse. In general, dissociation has to do with a state in which memory, consciousness, perception, identity, and understanding tend to become unconnected with one another.

Usually, one of the prominent causal features of dissociation is the presence of some form of trauma, intense stress, torture, abuse, and/or threat which pushes an individual in the direction of a phenomenological condition characterized by a combination of one, or more, of the following possibilities: despair, fear, terror, anxiety, alienation, de-realization (reality loses its sense of realness), vulnerability, loss of identity, doubt, insecurity, hopelessness, humiliation, de-personalization (loss of one’s sense of being a person), directionlessness (absence of any plan or ideas about how to proceed in life), purposelessness, depression, a sense of rootlessness (not feeling at home anywhere), demoralization, meaninglessness, lack of motivation, loss of control, and/or a sense of chaos and unpredictability concerning events.

The experience of dissociation may be acute (that is, transitory in nature) or chronic. Moreover, the intensity of felt dissociation may vary over a continuum of possibilities – ranging from that which is relatively low grade (although sufficiently strong to disrupt the way in which memory, identity, consciousness, perception, and understanding are normally connected to provide a relatively functionally coherent and consistent view of the world), to that which is severe and completely debilitating.

All forms of dissociation are experienced as being painful in essential ways -- although some forms may be felt to be more painful and more essential than others. Furthermore, due to factors such as personality, individual history, culture, and so on, different people may be vulnerable, to varying degrees, to the manner in which circumstances are experienced as dissociative in such essential ways

One of the primary reasons for the experience of psychic and somatic pain in conjunction with dissociation is that one’s essential sense of being a human is under attack. In other words, we all tend to think of being human in terms of the awareness, meaning, purpose, identity, choice, hopefulness, personhood, understanding, and sense of belonging (family, community, friends) which normally are woven into our perception of reality. However, if the force of circumstances, or one’s perception of the force of those circumstances, undermines one’s existential sense of what it is to be a human being, then, one begins to enter into a realm where our ideas about ourselves, others, and reality begin to dissolve. As a result, memory, perception, identity, motivation, and awareness begin to become dysfunctional, and whatever mode of glue (spiritual, emotional, conceptual, social, personal, philosophical, mythological) which was holding things together begins to dissolve and, as a result, one loses one’s sense of integration and rootedness.

Clinically speaking, DSM-IV (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 4th Edition) identifies five categories which are intended to encompass the sorts of dysfunctional responses which might arise in conjunction with the experience of dissociation. These are: (1) dissociative amnesia (a form of memory lapse which affects one’s ability to remember important details about one’s personal history); (2) dissociative fugue (often characterized by the assumption of a new identity along with a lapse of memory concerning one’s previous identity); (3) dissociative identity disorder (formerly known as multiple personality disorder and a condition in which two or more distinct identities are believed to have arisen within one and the same person); (4) depersonalization disorder (an intense, recurrent sense of having become detached from, and no longer identifying with, one’s mental and bodily processes as one’s own); (5) dissociative disorder not otherwise specified (a grab bag classification which seeks to cover all other instances in which symptoms of dissociation exist but which do not appear to be subsumable under any of the previous four categories).

Dissociative disorders all constitute responses to the presence of felt dissociation. In one sense, all such responses are dysfunctional because they require one to lose parts of oneself in the form of lost memory, identity, awareness, perception, understanding and integration as the price which is to be paid for being able to function at all. On the other hand, considered from another perspective, however dysfunctional dissociative disorders may be relative to one’s normal way of doing things prior to the advent of felt dissociation, nonetheless, such disorders all constitute an attempt by the individual to forge a way of responding to, and dealing with, the intense pain of the dissociative state.

Given the foregoing, I believe that terrorist activities constitute a dysfunctional response to the felt presence of dissociation (in effect, I am proposing a new category for the dissociative conditions listed in DSM-IV). Furthermore, above and beyond the parts of an individual which, to varying degrees, are lost and have become separated from one another (such as identity, awareness, perception, memory, and understanding) through the choice of a dysfunctional response to the felt presence of dissociation, something else has become lost in the dysfunctional responses which are expressed through terrorism – namely, a terrorist is someone who has lost faith in the non-violent tools which God has provided through revelation and the spiritual teachings of the prophets and saints concerning the nature of Divine guidance.

Dissociation does not just mark an individual’s separation from memory, perception, identity, and awareness. The experience of dissociation may also induce one to lose contact with values, morality, faith, and ethical considerations.

One does not have to believe in God in order to appreciate the fact that if another person does believe in God, and, then, suddenly, due to the trauma of circumstances, becomes spiritually disoriented, the loss of contact with faith which may be entailed by such disorientation is likely to have a profound impact on the way in which that individual seeks to find ways of warding off the felt presence of dissociation. One does not have to believe in God to understand that if a person lives in a community or culture where religious themes play significant roles in the shaping of perception, identity, memory, and awareness, then, if such an individual either loses contact with faith, or, perhaps, never had any faith to begin with, that person is likely to couch one’s coping strategy in religious terms even if the underlying motivations are quite remote from any sort of authentic spirituality. And, if one does believe in God, then, the foregoing considerations are likely to be appreciated in an even more intimate way.

Similarly, just because someone couches his or her rhetoric in terms such as 'democracy', 'freedom', 'political duty', 'rights', and 'justice', this does not necessarily mean that such a person actually sincerely believes in democracy, freedom, and rights. Different cultures give expression to philosophical, political, mythological, social, and spiritual themes which some people seek to parasitically exploit to serve an agenda other than the purposes and principles actually valued by a given culture while, simultaneously, having the appearance (but only the appearance) of being appropriate uses of those principles and purposes.

Just as the sort of dissociative disorders noted above in conjunction with DSM-IV all can be seen as attempts to fend off the experience of dissociation, however dysfunctional such attempts may be, so, too, becoming a terrorist is a dysfunctional attempt to fend off the painful experience of dissociation. Just as the five categories of dissociative disorders noted above all give expression to dysfunctional attempts to establish a new way of trying to integrate being in the face of felt dissociation (a form of integration which can never be functional because essential parts of being have been lost or separated off from that process of integration), so, too, terrorist activities are an attempt to fashion a new manner of integrating experience – and, again, an attempt which can never be successful because essential parts of being have been lost or separated off from such attempts at integration.

None of the foregoing is meant to excuse the acts of a terrorist. Nor, is any of the foregoing (nor what follows) intended to suggest that criminal penalties may not be appropriate responses to terrorist activities -- after all, there are many people who may suffer from a pathological condition, and the existence of such a condition does not render the acts of those people less culpable although these sorts of condition may, or may not, be mitigating factors in the assigning of punishment for such crimes. However, trying to understand the dynamics of terrorist activity should be considered to be an important step toward learning how to treat such a condition in a way that is not, itself, predicated on, and steeped in, the dynamics of dissociation and, therefore, equally dysfunctional.

A terrorist is someone who during her or his encounter with dissociative states has lost contact with important facets of perception, memory, understanding, identity, awareness, and, as well, moral or spiritual values. Furthermore, in the process of responding to the felt presence of dissociation, such an individual has made, or has been induced to make, dysfunctional choices concerning the issue of how to fashion a new sense of integrated being as a way of dealing with, and fending off, the felt presence of dissociation.

As is the case with other individuals who choose dysfunctional, maladaptive coping strategies for dealing with the felt presence of dissociation, a terrorist is someone who has been pushed or pulled into a condition of dissociation through traumatic, stressful, and/or abusive events. When individuals, families, communities, governments, corporations, and/or nations pursue political, economic, social, religious, and militant policies which, intentionally or unintentionally, push people into dissociative states, then, the former agencies help sow the seeds for terrorism.

Alternatively, the foregoing comments concerning the issue of dissociation helps to explain -- whether one is dealing with terrorist groups or recruitment into the military -- why the best candidates for induction are people who are in their late teens and early twenties. This is so because, oftentimes, the lives of such people are in transition with respect to issues of purpose, meaning, identity, career, family, alienation, and values. As a result, such individuals are most at risk when it comes to being vulnerable to being induced to accept a 'solution' for their sense of dissociation which is wedded to the idea of a willingness to commit violence against anything which is painted as a potential means of pulling one (or one's society) back into dissociation.

One can examine almost any set of circumstances existing in the world today, or in the past, where terrorist acts are perpetrated, and one, invariably, will find the forces of dissociation playing a very fundamental role in the etiology of the disorder known as terrorism. Whether one is considering so-called Christians who murder doctors involved with abortion clinics, or: Ian Paisley’s Irish Protestant movement, the Aryan Nation, the Irish Republican Army, suicide bombers of Hamas, the Chechnyan Liberation movement, the Japanese group Aum Shinrikyo, Bin Laden’s al-Qaeda, the Khalistan movement of militant Sikhs, the independence struggle in Kashmir, the violence of people such as Dr. Baruch Goldstein, Yigal Amir, and the Israeli settlers movement, the Rwandese Patriotic Front-led murderous rampage against Tutsi and moderate Hutu in Rwanda, the genocide in Darfur, Sudan, the Sendero Luminoso of Peru (The Shining Path), the Contras in Nicaragua, the Balkan wars, the Tamil Tigers in Sri Lanka -- in all of the foregoing sets of circumstance (and many more which could be cited), a variety of historical, cultural, political, religious, ethnic, racial, philosophical, and/or economic forces converged together that pushed or pulled people (both collectively and individually) into dissociative states which threatened them, or were perceived to threaten them, with a loss of control, purpose, meaning, identity, and stature in their lives, and, as well, induced a sense of alienation, anxiety, stress, fear, doubt, chaos, unpredictability, helplessness, vulnerability, insecurity, despair, humiliation, hopelessness, and/or de-realization with respect to events going on around them.

For example, consider the 1967 Israeli defeat of the Arabs. Many Arabs referred to this defeat as “al nakba”, the catastrophe. Al-nakba alludes to something beyond just a military reversal. Indeed, the defeat was, in a sense, a symptomatic expression of something pathological in many facets of Arab affairs at the time – corruption, tyrannical governments, dysfunctional economies, modernism gone awry, incompetent politicians, failed socialist experiments, chaotic violence, fourth-rate armies, borrowed technologies, as well as fawning, subservient relationships with the major powers.

This notion of al nakba – the catastrophe -- is an indication of the forces (intellectual, cultural, political, social, technological, international, spiritual, and historical) which were pulling many Arabs into the currents of dissociation. The issue was not just a matter of ethnic, national, historical, racial, linguistic, military, and cultural dissolution, but spiritual dissolution as well … after all, if theirs was the true religion, then, how could God permit such things to happen … this led to a lot of unanswered questions about identity, purpose, meaning, truth, character, government, society, and spirituality which, in turn, pulled and pushed many Arabs further into the grip of dissociative states … states that rendered some of these individuals vulnerable to the spiritual abuse of those who were inclined to acts of violence and used the idea of a religiously-coated terrorism as the solution for reversing al-nakba and extricating themselves from the psychic and soul-wrenching pain of their dissociative condition.

Terrorism is the only dissociative disorder which seeks to push others into the same state of dissociation as the one which underlies that dysfunctional response. The purpose of terrorism is to seek, whether directly or indirectly, to induce the lives of others to become: chaotic, de-personalized, de-realized, alienated, fear-laden, stressful, anxious, unpredictable, insecure, meaningless, hopeless, vulnerable, purposeless, lacking in direction, depressed, despairing, filled with humiliation, and demoralized.

On the one hand, the purpose of terrorism is to maximize the collateral damage of dissociation in others – the ones who the terrorist perceives have been responsible, directly or indirectly, for the presence of dissociation in his or her own lives. On the other hand, the purpose of terrorism is to seek to induce those who are perceived to be the cause of dissociation in the life of the terrorist to cease and desist with respect to those activities which are believed to have led to the presence of dissociation in the life of the terrorist.

Generally speaking, although there are exceptions to this (e.g., Billy Milligan – if one considers him a true case of dissociative identity disorder), those who suffer from the sort of dissociative disorders listed in DSM-IV do not harm others. The dysfunctional, maladaptive coping strategies which arise out of the dissociative conditions underlying those strategies are primarily geared to help the individual cope with his, or her, own internal sense of dissociation in terms which are self-directed rather than other-directed.

In the case of terrorism, however, one of the primary driving forces being expressed through the dysfunctional, maladaptive coping strategies of a terrorist dissociative disorder is to do violence (emotional, psychological, social, physical, economic, and/or spiritual) to others. The terrorist believes that the cause of his or her felt sense of dissociation has a remedy which revolves around an external locus of control, whereas most dissociative disorders involve remedies which revolve around an internal adjustment (involving memory, awareness, perception, and/or identity) to the felt presence of dissociation.

The terrorist generates, or is induced to generate, delusions (belief systems which tend to be false and detached from actual conditions) concerning the role of the ‘other’ in the etiology of the felt presence of dissociation. These delusional states are possible because of a loss of contact with the sort of integrated elements of memory, perception, identity, and awareness which are necessary for performing a reality check -- a loss of contact which has been brought on by the presence of dissociative elements in the life of the terrorist.

The presence of felt dissociation does not automatically lead to a dissociative disorder. Furthermore, as indicated previously, although all dissociative disorders constitute dysfunctional, maladaptive coping strategies, terrorism is only one possible response to the felt presence of dissociation.

One of the factors which determines whether, or not, the presence of felt dissociation will lead to a dissociative disorder of the terrorist variety revolves around the issue of faith. More specifically, although the rhetoric of terrorism is often imbued with themes of God, Divine justice/judgment, religious truths, faith, and the like, one of the delusions from which a terrorist suffers is the belief that he or she is still in functional contact with tools of faith or morality.

Despite the religious rhetoric of terrorists, violence is not a tool of faith or morality. In fact, with very limited exceptions, the presence of violence is, usually, a symptom of an absence of faith or morality -- and this is as true for nations which collectively perpetrate violence and terrorism in the name of some delusional theory concerning God, democracy, and justice as it is for individuals who perpetrate violence in the name of some personal, delusional form of justification.

To be sure, certain acts of violence may be legitimately reconcilable with a spiritual or moral perspective within some limited contexts (at the same time this is not meant to dismiss the possibility of choosing to be non-violent, even at the cost of one’s life or the life of one’s loved ones, can also be a moral, faith-based response to the same set of circumstances). These contexts of, potentially, justifiable violence are far more limited and constrained than some people may suppose and usually involve repelling -- within boundaries which should not be transgressed -- direct, unavoidable, unprovoked or unjustified acts of physical aggression against one’s person, one’s family, or one’s local community.

Notwithstanding the foregoing sorts of special, limited circumstances (and, perhaps, not even then, as necessary as such acts may be), violence toward others cannot be considered to be a tool of faith or morality. Indeed, tools of faith such as: patience, kindness, forgiveness, tolerance, love, compassion, charitableness, humility, nobility, integrity, objectivity, balance, hope, fairness, and honesty form an integral part of Divine guidance across all spiritual traditions due to, among other things, the capacity of such qualities to assist a person to find alternative solutions to problems which are not violent in nature. As such, tools of faith and morality are the direct antithesis of tools of violence as ways of seeking to: resolve conflict, worship Divinity, submit to Divine guidance, or treat others with righteousness and equitability.

In many instances, the delusion that violence toward others is a way of demonstrating one’s faith in, or love of, or commitment to, God has been induced through a process of spiritual abuse which is perpetrated by so-called ‘leaders’ who wish to manipulate, deceive, and exploit people – people who are vulnerable due to an on-going condition of dissociation -- to serve the non-spiritual ends of the ‘leaders’. Such ‘leaders’ teach a delusional approach to life rather than an approach which is rooted in the aforementioned tools of faith, but, the delusional ‘solution’ which is taught constitutes a much easier and simpler – albeit spiritually and morally reprehensible -- way of doing things.

Acquiring tools of faith is very difficult work. Acquiring tools of violence is relatively effortless, often taking not more than a few hours, days, or weeks of one’s time.

Acting in accordance with tools of faith requires considerable thought, reflection, focus, insight, prayer, meditation, and wisdom concerning all sides of a problem. Acting in concert with tools of violence often requires little thought except that which is given to how to perpetrate the act.

One of the primary obstacles to performing terrorist acts is the presence of faith. One of the primary techniques of spiritual charlatans (whether they call themselves shaykhs, ministers, imams, teachers, theologians, government leaders, muftis, preachers, rabbis, gurus, mujtahids, or the like) who are involved in terrorism and wish to entangle others in their violent delusions is to undermine, corrupt, eliminate, distort, or mislead whatever faith exists in a candidate for terrorism -- a candidate being defined as someone whose condition of dissociation makes them vulnerable to the development of dysfunctional, maladaptive coping strategies concerning the handling of such felt dissociation.

Perhaps the best way of illustrating the connection between spiritual abuse and terrorism is to take an in-depth look at the delusional systems which are created by those who wish to induce others to commit acts of terrorism. Although the following discussion focuses on the issue of jihad, the underlying principles and ideas are applicable to virtually any context in which one person (‘leader’), institution, group, agency, or government seeks to induce others to commit acts of violence on its behalf.

The delusional dimension of the process through which a susceptible individual (e.g., some, but not all, people who have been pushed toward dissociation as outlined earlier) buys into, or becomes shaped by, a delusional system (such as terrorism, or some other relationship of undue influence -- as in relation to so-called ‘mystical’ charlatans) is an extremely important element in bridging the transformation from non-terrorist to terrorist activities. Such delusional systems give expression to three main features which are very enticing to certain people in a state of dissociation: (1) delusional systems help an individual to escape the pain of dissociation by replacing a deep sense of: alienation, fear, stress, feeling scattered, doubt, malaise, anxiety, depression, identity diffusion, and the like, with a sense of purpose, meaning, direction, identity, coherency, direction, focus, motivation, and belonging; (2) delusional systems offer a coping strategy -- maladaptive though it may be -- for resisting the pull of dissociative states which, like vultures waiting for something to die, exist at the horizons of one’s life due to prevailing circumstances; (3) delusional systems provide a rationalized system of values which lowers the threshold with respect to a person’s willingness to commit violence against those who -- according to the delusional system being touted -- are perceived, rightly or wrongly, as having a major role to play in helping to bring about one’s previous condition of dissociation.

Anyone who believes that terrorists are, for the most part, inherently sociopathic monsters -- that is, they are born, not made -- completely misunderstands the phenomenon of terrorism. To be sure, there are certain individuals who gravitate to terrorist activities because of the presence of some form of mental pathology (such as anti-social personality disorder, narcissistic personality disorder, borderline personality disorder, and so on), but these individuals often become “leaders” within terrorist movements, and, consequently, such individuals tend to induce others to sacrifice their lives in the commission of violence rather than sacrificing their own lives.

The foot-soldiers of terrorism tend to be individuals who are “rescued” from a dissociative condition. There are “reasons” -- maladaptive though those ‘reasons’ may be -- for allowing oneself to come under the influence of a delusional terrorist paradigm concerning the ills of the world and how to ‘heal’ those maladies.

Individuals from financially and socially well-to-do backgrounds, who are well-educated, are as vulnerable to being pulled or pushed into dissociative states as people from a background of poverty who live amidst the bottom strata of society, and are poorly educated. The determining factor is not socio-economic but whether, or not, an individual is grappling with the psychic dogs of dissociation, and, thereby, is vulnerable to the enticements of the sort of delusional systems which appear to offer a way to free himself or herself from the painful, debilitating grip of dissociation.

One should try to keep the foregoing considerations in mind when reading the following discussion about jihad. Jihad -- when construed in the sense of indiscriminate violence – gives expression to a delusional paradigm which encompasses a variety of pay-offs for susceptible individuals. Some of these payoffs concern myths about the afterlife. Some of these payoffs involve the money which may be paid to one’s relatives when one sacrifices one’s life for ‘the cause’. Some of these payoffs may have to do with the adulation and respect which one believes will accrue to oneself when one has sacrificed one’s life. But, first and foremost, one of the major payoffs of such a delusional system is the way in which individuals in a dissociative condition are provided with a way out of that condition, not fully understanding (again, as a result of the influence of the delusional paradigm in which they are becoming entangled) that there is a huge price to be paid which dwarfs whatever payoffs may come their way -- that price is the loss of their soul and any remnants of authentic faith which they may have had prior to becoming entangled in terrorist activities … a loss which is due to a reliance on the tools of violence to solve problems rather than the tools of faith.

A considerable amount of time is spent in the following pages examining some of the arguments which extremist, fundamentalist jihadists use to try to justify violence, as well their selection of targets against which such violence is to be directed. By deconstructing the delusional character of the paradigm of violence, one is in a better position to develop programs and policies which are based on actual insight into some of the dynamics of the terrorist perspective rather than based on political theologies concerning democracy, capitalism, and freedom which, unfortunately, all too frequently are rooted in the very same kind of delusional phenomenology as the terrorists against which such theologies are aimed.

It is a very seductive argument -- whether this is propagated by would-be terrorists or by those who regulate the activities of military units -- to claim that acts of violence are warranted by goals of ‘truth’, ‘justice’, salvation, and ‘freedom’. It is a very powerful argument -- whether this is put forth by would-be terrorists or by those who regulate the activities of military units -- to seek to induce people to believe that God, duty, and/or honor sanctions or legitimizes violence against a given people or set of individuals. It is a very compelling argument to assert -- whether this is done by would-be terrorists or by those who regulate the activities of military units -- that one is engaged in a great, cosmic war between the forces of good and evil and that the side for which one is committing violence gives expression to the ‘good’ rather than the ‘evil’ and, consequently, this somehow sanitizes indiscriminate violence and rehabilitates it. It is a very alluring argument -- whether this is made by would-be terrorists or by those who regulate the activities of military units -- that all those who are labeled as ‘evil-doers’, or people of unacceptable spiritual pedigree, or people who will not submit to our way of life deserve to be oppressed or do not deserve due process, or are not worthy of equitable treatment.

Most of the following comments are directed specifically at those who are advocates of indiscriminate violence against people and societies that are considered to be un-Islamic, infidels, unbelievers, apostates, or insufficiently Muslim. However, the horizontal implications of the following comments are intended to extend to anyone who believes that indiscriminate violence against people -- irrespective of who these people may be -- is something which gives expression to civility, common decency, spiritual etiquette, or actually gives the most eloquent expression of what Divinity truly wishes for humanity.

Almost any spiritual or humanistic tradition can fabricate arguments justifying violence. However, almost invariably, such arguments totally distort principles by removing issues from their appropriate contexts and which, as well, ignore the many other principles of such a tradition which come down firmly on the side of tools of faith rather than tools of violence.

(To be continued tomorrow, God willing)

Anab Whitehouse

Story Part 2

(Continued from yesterday's blog entry)

“There used to be saint who lived in a certain vicinity outside of a town. Although the townspeople knew of his existence and held him in great esteem, nevertheless, for the most part, they used to leave him alone.

“However, a drought had been gripping the entire region and the townspeople were becoming desperate because if they didn’t get rain soon, the crops would die and, therefore, so would many people in the community during the coming winter. A delegation from the town approached the saint and asked if he would intervene with Divinity on their behalf.

“The saint thought about the request, took a wet handkerchief from the wash he had been doing and instructed the delegation to take the piece of cloth and put it on a rock outside where it could dry. The saint’s directive was followed, and no sooner had this been done, then a heavy rain began to fall.

“The people in the delegation were extremely happy, expressed their gratitude to the saint, and thanked God for the desperately needed rain. Soon, they went back to their homes.

“About a week later, another delegation came to the saint’s home. This time, their problem was the exact opposite from what previously had been the case.

“In fact, ever since they had asked for the saint’s assistance with the drought, there had been non-stop rain. Now, their crops were in danger of being ruined because of an excess of water and an absence of sunlight.

“Hearing their plight, the saint took off a bandana which was hung around his neck and said: ‘Please take this outside while it is still raining so it can be washed. It is quite soiled in places.’

“The delegation did as requested and, immediately, as soon as they went outside, the rain stopped. They were all very happy with the change in weather, but they were also somewhat puzzled.

“Returning to where the saint had been sitting, one of the delegation members asked: ‘Sir, when you asked for something of yours to be dried, it rained, and when you wanted something of yours washed, it became dry. We don’t understand.’

“The saint raised his eyebrows and gave a shrug which seemed to say –‘Well what can one do’ – and he commented: “My relationship with God these days is such that whatever I want, the opposite is done.”

No sooner had the spiritual guide finished the story about the saint, she continued on: “One mistake which you both are making with respect to your relationship is that you don’t seem to realize what the name of the dance is that you are supposed to be doing, and you are upset because you both are trying to do one kind of dance, and Divinity is engaging you in another kind of Dance which neither of you are interested in doing -- at least, not at the present time.

“The saint in the story had learned the secret of not arguing with the Beloved because although his relationship was such that whatever he wanted, Divinity did the opposite, the saint was wise enough to change his approach to things and, thereby, operate in accordance with how Divinity wished things to go, rather than how he wished them to be. When he wanted something washed, or something dried, he sincerely wanted the washing or drying to occur, but he also knew what the result would be, and he accepted that ... completely, without resentment or feeling hurt.

“You each are doing a variation of the ‘I’ve been done dirt’ two-step, but that’s not the dance you should be doing ... not at all. Apparently, God has arranged things in a way that is the opposite of what each of you want, but you haven’t developed the wisdom, yet, to make adjustments to accept God’s way of doing things rather than your own.

“You both are being resistant to God’s will. However, you each assume the source of the conflict is a function of your respective disagreements with one another, when, in truth, the source of conflict is the way you both insist on arguing with the Beloved – in other words, Divinity.

“You don’t seem to realize you are engaged in a much more important dance than the ‘you done me dirt’ two-step because your real partner is Divinity and your spouse is just one of the ways through which God relates to you, and you to Divinity, during the course of the Big Dance -- which contrary to the opinion of many does not refer, primarily, to playing professional sports or vying for athletic championships. You show your regard, or lack thereof, for God by the way you treat your spouse, since it is God Who, for Divine reasons, puts you together as dance partners in the first place.

“Someone once said that ‘marriage is half the faith’. Since faith only develops through being tested, challenged, and placed in the forge of life, then marriage is an excellent way to strengthen and improve the quality of one’s faith because marriage is filled with struggles - both small and large.

“Among other things, marriage requires: patience, tolerance, empathy, forgiveness, repentance, sincerity, trust, kindness, compassion, love, persistence, courage, sacrifice, selflessness, nobility, magnanimity, and so many other things. Moreover, marriage needs these qualities not from just one of the partners, but from both of them.

“There are two ways of ‘dancing in the dark’. One is warm, intimate, glorious, loving – when two move as one, in synch with the music’s rhythms and moods. The other manner of dancing in the dark is when the couple bumps into things, steps on one another’s toes – figuratively and literally, and are so preoccupied with the pain
of the experience, they lose their feel for the music to which they should be dancing.

“You two have been doing the latter kind of dancing in the dark. There is a mismatch of: expectations, hopes, desires, needs, and interests. As a result, you are tripping all over one another.

“You each insist on leading and get annoyed with the other person for not following. You each hang on to your silly ideas about who is right and who is wrong.

“In a song entitled: ‘For What’s Its Worth’ by the Buffalo Springfield, there is a line which states: “Nobody’s right, if everybody’s wrong,” and you both are wrong in what you are doing.

“One of the worst things we can do when in a relationship is to hold onto our ideas of rightness, because when we feel we are right, we have no place left to move, and, furthermore, our sense of rightness fuels our sense of being justified in holding onto our anger, mistrust, impatience, unkindness, selfishness, and so on, ad nauseam.
When we believe we are right and justified, we tend to make moral judgements about the other person, and in making such judgements we become even more convinced that our hurt, sense of betrayal, and resentments are all justified.

“But even if one were 100% correct in all one’s accusations concerning one’s spouse, where does this really get us? It doesn’t get us anywhere because we are stuck with all our negative feelings, and we have no place to go with those negative feelings except for them to become, at best, smoldering, underground fires which flare up
under the right circumstances, and, at worse, they simply become more intense and entrenched over the years.

“If you ask married couples what they want when they start out, almost all of them would say, they want: happiness, peace, harmony, intimacy, trust, commitment, sincerity, respect. Yet, as Tolstoy, I believe, once said, ‘everybody wants to go to heaven, but no one wants to die.’

“And, die we must. We must die to what we want, and become alive to what God wants of us -- in marriage and out of marriage.

“How can anyone possibly hope to perform a dance of love if one is not prepared to listen to, and comply with, the music, the rhythms, and the harmonies of the Divine Band. If we insist on marching to the sound of our own drummer, we might be great individualists, but we will be lousy dance partners – and, more than anything, life is about dancing – not marching ... life is feeling the Divine music with all one’s being and learning to go with the flow of that music ... therein lies the secret of our happiness and contentment.

“When we are thoughtful, kind, compassionate, forbearing, charitable, patient, noble, and so on, we are in synch with the Divine music, and when we are in synch in this deep soulful and heart-felt manner, we experience in our souls and our hearts, the justice and love which permeates the universe. However, when we are selfish,
impatient, unkind, inconsiderate, unforgiving, and the like, then, we distance ourselves from God’s music and we introduce disharmony, injustice, and enmity as counterpoint to God’s melodies and rhythms.

“Neither partner in a marriage ought to lead. Both of them should follow the Divine lead and learn the Divine Dance.

“When we are wrong, there is room for movement. One can repent for the error one has made, and, then, struggle to become one with the truth.

“When one is right, or believes oneself to be, there is no room for movement, and one has no motivation to change one’s behavior. Consequently, it is better to assume one may be wrong and allow some degrees of freedom for improvement, rather than to presume one is right and be stuck with a lot of negative emotional baggage one cannot jettison because one has no incentive to do so – after all, why should one change if one supposes oneself to be right or justified?

“If you look at the great saints, they have a profound sense of humility and modesty. These people are friends of God, and, yet, they are quite aware of their own imperfections and are willing to accept the possibility that nearly everyone else is better than they are. They always feel there is room for improvement.

“And, yet, people who are married, most of whom are not saints, have almost no humility or modesty when it comes to issues of assuming themselves to be right or justified in how they behave or treat one another. This is a recipe for disaster.

“The purpose of marriage is not primarily about sexual intimacy, or raising a family, or establishing a home -- although all of these have their importance and their place. Rather, the primary purpose of marriage is to have an opportunity for learning about the great lessons of life: patience, kindness, commitment, sincerity, forgiveness, repentance, trust, gratitude, self-sacrifice, compassion, and love.

“This is the essence of the mystical waltz, whereas the world calls us to the Mephisto waltz, the exact opposite. When we dance to the tune of the latter, we feel nothing but pain, and, ironically, despite all of the misery the Mephisto waltz gives to us, its very nature is to induce and incite us to indulge our bad moods, attitudes, and feelings, and, in so doing, seduce us into refusing to give that dance up even though we understand it is the source of all of our unhappiness.

“One of the keys to learning the steps of the mystical waltz is to stop criticizing God’s creation - and God’s creation includes one’s spouse. With criticism, comes a hardening of our spiritual arteries, and when the life line of our hearts become constricted, then, the heart is less able to perform its intended function – which is to listen to, be in synchronicity with, and respond to, the rhythms of the music
played by Divinity for the purpose of life’s dance.

“When we judge our spouse this fuels our sense of justification for feeling angry, resentment, mistrustful, suspicious. And, such emotions are never to our advantage ... only to our disadvantage because they don’t accomplish anything of a constructive nature. All they do is underwrite discord, enmity, separation, and self-
aggrandizement.

“Now, please don’t misunderstand me, I am not saying one should have to put up with endless rounds of bad behavior from one’s spouse. What I’m saying is a couple must search their hearts and determine what kind of dance they are interested in pursuing – the mystical waltz or the Mephisto waltz.

“Believe me, if a couple is truly interested in doing the mystical waltz together, then, despite whatever mis-steps there might be, they will work out the differences together in an amicable fashion, and, then, move on. Moreover, people who are sincerely committed to such a Divine dance will feel the joy and peace which comes when they die to themselves in order to be able to trip the light fantastic in
a mystical way.

“If one, or the other, or both partners in a marriage are not interested in learning how to do the mystical waltz, then, the bitter fruits of this sort of intention will be all too painfully palpable. And, under such circumstance it is better for these individuals to say “Peace” and go their separate ways so that they might find partners who share common values and purposes, and who are like-hearted with respect to the nature of the dance they wish to do.

“Just as the moon is the last outpost of light from the sun in the night sky, so, the soul is the last outpost of light from the spirit, in the darkness of the material world. When two people become one in the mystical waltz, then, as they dance their dance of harmony and intimacy in the darkness, it is like dancing with the moon, for, by the Grace of God, the light of the spirit shines upon their souls, and the night becomes bright with the sound of music ... Divine music -- and there is only one Source of rhythms, and one Source of movement, and one Source of intimacy, and one Source of melody, and all purposes are reconciled.”

Anab

Story

The couple had been arguing for months. Quite skillfully, the pair’s spiritual guide had been skirting around the issue for quite some time, keeping her distance as best she could.

Her primary task was to help the two, as individuals, to enhance the quality of their spiritual lives. However, since matters of the world often spill over into, and create problems for, mystical pursuits, she couldn’t ignore what was going on between the two. The challenge was sort of like a high wire balancing act.

On the one hand, she had to avoid falling into the trap of allowing herself to be dragged into the matter, and, as a result, be perceived, among other things, as taking sides, thereby risking having one of the two distance himself or herself from the spiritual path. On the other hand, if something wasn’t done soon, both of them might allow the negative emotions which were running at high tide in their relationship to completely inundate their spiritual activities altogether.

However, when the local version of the ‘War of the Roses’ seemed destined to enter extra innings and, in addition, began to suck other people of the spiritual circle into the dangerous, outer currents of the marital maelstrom, she decided things had reached a fail safe point and that something needed to be done to address the issue ... for the good of all. Although the spiritual guide had talked with each of the parties on an individual basis, dropping subtle hints, here and there, about how to treat one’s spouse as a partner in life, rather than as an adversary, these sessions appeared to have fallen on deaf hearts, and, so, a much more direct, joint meeting was indicated.

The couple had agreed to come to their teacher’s home in the evening. As a joke, and, hopefully, as a way of lightening the atmosphere somewhat, she briefly entertained the idea of receiving the two in full Samurai battle gear, but discarded the idea because the two were far too caught up in unpleasantness to be able to laugh at themselves.

She knew that, deep down, both of them loved one another. Yet, unfortunately, and as occurs all too frequently, their love for one another had been misplaced or lost or buried somewhere along the way, and, consequently, they had forgotten how, why, or where they had become separated from the river of love which once flowed so freely and abundantly between the two of them.

After the two showed up at her door, like strangers who happened to stumble onto her porch as a result of an improbable set of coincidences, and she had greeted them, taken them into her study, seated them, and provided some refreshments, she sat down as well. She dispensed with any preliminary chitchat, and, instead, walked straight into the arena and said to herself: “For those who are about die, we salute you.”

She began: “There were two seekers of the truth who once made a journey together. Unavoidably, the route which they planned to take took them straight through the heart of countryside inhabited by people who were their sworn enemies – that is, enemies of anyone who was interested in seeking truth in a way other than what people of that country accepted as being ‘the’ proper path to truth.

“For most of their journey, the companions – through a combination of intelligence, vigilance, and luck – had managed to stay out of difficulty. But, one day, events conspired to intersect their path with that of one of their avowed antagonists.

“Essentially, what happened is the following. The pair came to a small river where they found a man lying on the bank nearest to them.

“The path of their journey was such that the two hoped to ford the river at this point since it was the shallowest portion of the river for quite some distance in either direction. The man on the ground had injured his leg and needed to get to the other side where he had a horse and cart tied up.

“Even though the water was relatively shallow at this juncture of the river, nonetheless, it still was too deep to negotiate for a man with an injured leg – especially, given that there were some strong currents which came into play near the far bank. The man needed help, but the two could tell, by the color of the hat the man wore, that he was also one of those who had tremendous enmity for adherents
to what such people considered to be apocryphal teachings.

“One of the two traveling companions offered to carry the man on his back. The injured man accepted the offer with gratitude, not realizing that the two strangers were precisely the sort of people with whom he would not be caught dead under other circumstances.

“A short while later, all three individuals were safely on the other bank of the river. The one who had carried the injured man across the river also helped him get onto his cart, and, then, the two travelers bid the man farewell and continued on with their journey.

“The pair walked in silence for some time. Eventually, they stopped in order to eat something.

“The two had been friends for a long time. They knew one another’s quirks, moods, and manner of engaging life.

“One friend knew that something was bothering his buddy so he said: ‘What’s up? I know something is upsetting you. Why not tell me what’s on your mind?’

“His companion was a forthright individual, so he replied: ‘I don’t think you should have helped that injured man this afternoon. The guy hates people like us, and if he had come to know anything about what we believe, once he got to the other side he probably would have called his neighbors to murder us and believed that both the killing and the help he was given was as God wished.’

“His friend shook his head in sadness and remarked: “You know, I took that guy off my back hours ago, but you still are carrying him around with you. Why don’t you put him down? Our journey is taxing enough as it is without the extra baggage.”

Upon completing her story, the spiritual guide was quiet, giving the couple sitting in her study an opportunity to reflect upon the tale’s potential significance for their own situation. A few minutes passed like this.

The man shifted in his chair, coughed once, and said: “That was a very good story. I liked it a lot.” Then, casting a sideways glance at his wife, he added: “I wish certain people would appreciate its teaching as much as I have.”

His wife’s lips curled into a tight smirk and she shook her head, as if to say –‘there you go again, always at me, always criticizing.’ The man’s wife said: “Well, notwithstanding the opinion of some people, I also loved your story. But, you know what really boils my brass,” and she started to say something, hesitated, looked at her teacher in embarrassment, and closed her mouth so that one could see the muscles in her jaw tighten.

The wife was silent for a moment longer before saying: “I really wish I could take a long holiday somewhere ... you know ... just get away from all the pressure, stress, and conflict. In fact, I’ve been thinking about, maybe, going to that spiritual retreat out in the countryside which is affiliated with our spiritual center.

“Maybe, I could do this for an extended period of time. I think it would do me a lot of good,” she asserted.

Upon hearing the woman’s thoughts, the spiritual guide said: “I once knew a fellow who was a very dedicated member of some spiritual group or other. In fact, if memory serves me here, he was so committed that he sacrificed job, career, family, and quite a few other things in order to go and live at a monastery, ash-ram, or the like – I forget, now, exactly where it was that he went, but it was remote and cut off from the rest of the world.

“This guy loved the place. He adored its quiet, its remoteness, its simple life, its code of letting everyone do his or her own thing.

“He spent all his days and nights at the spiritual center just reading sacred scriptures, chanting, fasting, doing vigils, helping out in the kitchen, discussing spiritual issues with the other residents, working in the garden, and taking long, peaceful walks through the forests and around the lake which was on the property. The entire set of experiences was exhilarating, joyous, ecstatic, life-affirming.

“Indeed, the whole arrangement was so wonderful the man stayed at the retreat for fifteen years. Eventually, he felt sufficiently energized and in-tune with his own being that he decided to re-enter the world beyond the horizons of the spiritual center where he had been living.

“Consequently, he got an apartment and a job in a nearby city. Surprisingly, before long, he was miserable and his life was filled with difficulties that quickly were overwhelming and consuming him.

“The problem was simple. None of what he had learned at the spiritual center was being transferred to his new circumstances – not because there weren’t valuable teachings being transmitted through the spiritual center, but because he hadn’t learned how to make those teachings work outside of the very restricted, protected, remote, simplified way of life which was being lived at the spiritual center.

“He had allowed himself to be deluded into supposing that because he had a strong faith when he was not called upon to test such faith while spending time at the spiritual center, he also believed his faith would remain intact when he moved to a world that would challenge his principles, values, and commitments at every turn, and he was wrong.

“Fasting, chanting, vigils, seclusion, discussion, and reading are all important activities. But, they are a preparation for living, not a substitute, and one tends to run into problems when one assumes that if one can do such feats of austerity, that, therefore, being able to successfully engage the world will follow automatically .

“It’s similar to the difference between military training and actual battle. One might be great in boot camp and, yet, fall apart during combat, because although the two are related, they are not the same.

“Or, to take another example, there are people who do very, very well in the context of schools but cannot, or will not, make the adjustment to non-school environments. Knowing how to play the school game is not necessarily the same thing as knowing how to play the game of life.

“Running from life is not the answer to anything. One needs to learn how to run to life and embrace life for the set of opportunities it is.”

The husband’s eyes had been aglow all through the teacher’s story and follow-up commentary. He was eager to say something, and when he was sure his teacher had finished, he blurted out: “I’ve been trying to tell my wife exactly that for so many years. Of course, I didn’t say it anywhere near as beautifully or succinctly as you did, but the gist of my ideas were pretty much the same.”

A grimace appeared on his face. “I just get so annoyed with her when she goes into these hide and seek games she plays, as if running away is the answer to everything.”

The spiritual guide lowered her gaze to the floor and replied: “There was a woman I used to know many years ago who had a daughter. During the summer, every evening around twilight time, the two of them would sit out on the veranda, while talking and
listening to the birds sing their bedtime songs.

“The daughter was in her late teens or early twenties. She used to stay with her mother when home on summer vacation from the university.

“One evening, the mother asked her daughter what the name of a certain bird was that was perched on a long limb of a nearby tree. The mother described exactly where she was looking so her daughter would be able to identify what her mother was referring to.

“The daughter told her mother the name of the bird, and her mother thanked her, and the two were silent for awhile. A short while later, the same thing happened again.

“The daughter was a little puzzled about this and thoughts of Alzheimer’s passed through her consciousness, but, once more, the daughter answered her mother’s query, but a slight, subtle strand of annoyance had crept into the daughter’s voice. As before, her mother thanked her daughter for the information.

“A few moments later, her mother asked the precise same question, and her daughter said in an exasperated tone of voice: “For goodness sake, Mom, will you ask some other question, I’ve already answered your question twice within a very short period of time. What is it with you on this bird thing?”

“Her mother smiled at her daughter’s remarks -- the way mothers do when they see the faults of their children but love them anyway. She said: “I guess you don’t remember when you were very young – maybe 3 or 4 – you used to ask me that same question five
times a day for weeks on end, and every time you would ask me, I would give you the information you sought, and I enjoyed doing it. The mother paused, briefly, before adding: “Whatever else they teach you at university, patience doesn’t appear to be in the curriculum.”

Upon the conclusion of their teacher’s story, the man’s wife laughed, commenting: “How completely appropriate.”

She looked over at her husband and said: When one person wants something, they want everybody to be patient, but when the shoe is on the other foot, well ...,”and her voice drifted off.

The teacher said: “Actually, the story was for both of you, as are all the stories which I have been relating to you. I’m not directing these stories at one or the other of you, but to both of you.”

She studied the couple for a moment. “Do you two dance together at all?”

The couple shook their heads in unison -- one of the first things they had agreed upon all evening ... and for quite a few months. The husband said: “We used to dance when we were dating, a long time ago, but we haven’t done so in years. Why, are you suggesting the solution to our problems is that we go out dancing more?”

“Not exactly,” the teacher said. “And, yet, the whole idea of dancing has a lot of relevance to what I see going on between the two of you.”

The spiritual guide paused and, then, remarked: “Maybe, by way of introduction and in the hopes that I am not inciting any impatience in either of you, I could relate another story.”

She looked at the two of them. They both gave signs of interest.

To be continued tomorrow . . . (God Willing)

A Story from Mystical Horizons

Focus

There was a man who wished to become a mystic. He had wanted to do this as long as he could remember.

He had searched for many years in order to find a spiritual guide. Finally, all his efforts were rewarded when, almost miraculously, events unfolded in such a way that he came to know about a spiritual guide who, recently, had moved into the region to
which the seeker, himself, due to a variety of circumstances, had just migrated.

When he learned of the fortuitous turn of events, he became very excited. Immediately, he began making plans for traveling to the spiritual teacher’s home town.

He waited for the right set of circumstances to arise – circumstances that included having a number of free days strung together so he would have time to make the necessary journey, establish contact with the teacher, and, hopefully, spend a few days learning from that person, before returning home. Soon, he saw his opportunity take shape, and, as a result, he activated his plan.

The physical portion of the trip was uneventful. He arrived in the small town, booked a place to stay, deposited his bags in the room, and got a bite of food at a nearby restaurant.

Afterwards, he made a few inquiries about the teacher and discovered that the gentleman spent an hour, or so, in the town square just about the same time, every afternoon. People described the spiritual guide as being very friendly and approachable.

The seeker decided to start visiting the square the very next day. Perhaps, with a little luck, he would be able to meet with the teacher in fairly short order.

The afternoon of the following day slowly rolled around. The visitor went to the square, which was just a short walk from the hotel where he was staying, and began looking for the spiritual guide.

By carefully observing what went on in the square, he was able to identify the person he had traveled to see. When the latter individual was alone for a moment, the seeker made his move and went over to the bench where the teacher was seated.

He introduced himself, and just as he had been informed on the previous day, the man was both very friendly and quite approachable. A discussion ensued which, eventually, the seeker was able to steer to the topic of mysticism.

The two had an animated discussion on this subject for a short while. In fact, the discussion, went so well that the seeker had the courage to say: “I would like to step onto the mystical path. I understand there is an initiation process surrounding this entry into mysticism, and I am wondering if you would initiate me.”

The teacher remained friendly but said: “No, I’m sorry, that is not possible.” As soon as he said this, he began talking about issues other than mysticism.

The seeker tried, several times, to move the discussion back to matters of spirituality. Although the spiritual guide remained very affable, nevertheless, on each occasion the teacher was able to deftly deflect the seeker’s attempts to return to the topic of the mystical path in another, non-mystical direction.

Finally, the teacher looked at his watch, apologized for having to leave, and, proceeded to rise. He warmly shook the seeker’s hand and, then, he walked off, wishing the seeker well as he did so.

The man remained on the bench, watching the teacher disappear around a street corner leading away from the square. He was puzzled.

Things had not gone at all the way he had envisioned. Consequently, he began to replay the entire discussion in his mind’s eye, trying to figure out where the problem might lie.

After giving the matter much thought while sitting on the bench, walking around town, eating supper, and lying down on his bed in the hotel, he had not been able to come up with anything that had happened during the discussion which might account for why his overture to obtain initiation had been rebuffed.

The man, however, did develop a few hypotheses concerning the situation. He would test these possibilities the next day.

The night and morning came and went. Afternoon had begun.

The seeker went to the town square and saw the teacher sitting on the same bench as the previous day. After a few people stopped and talked with the guide, a time came when the teacher was sitting by himself.

The seeker again approached the teacher and asked the latter if it was okay for him to sit and talk. The teacher’s face lighted up, and he invited the visitor to sit down.

The teacher was polite, entertaining, and friendly, giving absolutely no indication of there being any ill-will present toward the seeker. The two engaged in an amiable discussion of sports, politics, and a few other topics.

During the ensuing discussion, the seeker worked certain ideas into the exchange in order to test his theories of what might be the problem. When none of his hypotheses proved tenable, he decided to, once again, broach the subject of initiation.

He asked to be initiated into the mystical way. The teacher responded in precisely the same way as on the first day they met: “No, I’m sorry, that is not possible”, and like yesterday, he continued to talk in a warm and friendly matter about other subjects until the time for his departure arrived.

This time the guide walked away in a different direction, but the seeker was left in the same predicament. What was going on? Why wasn’t it possible for the initiation to take place?

The seeker was not only disappointed but he was a little annoyed and angry with the events of the past two days. Tomorrow, he decided, if the chance arose, he would confront the teacher in a direct fashion and try to discover why the request for initiation seemed to be falling on deaf ears.

He spent a restless night, tossing and turning. The clocks seemed to be involved in the possible conspiracy for they moved in a way that suggested they were resisting bringing the afternoon on in a timely fashion.

The afternoon, however, did finally take place. The seeker went to the square, found the teacher sitting alone, and quickly reached the bench.

The teacher looked up, saw the man approach and smiled in a very inviting and charming manner. The seeker asked if it was okay to sit with the teacher for a little while, and the teacher warmly assented to the request.

Choosing to avoid dancing about with small talk, the seeker said: “I don’t wish to be offensive or rude, but several times over the last two days, I have asked you to initiate me into the mystical way, and on each occasion, you have said ‘no’. Why?”

The teacher briefly gazed at the man and, then, turned his head away, surveying the rest of the square as he did. Very gently he said: “If you were willing to trust me to be your guide, don’t you feel you might trust my judgment that, at least at the present time, you are not ready for the mystical path?”

The words were rather unexpected and had a point -- a sharp one. The seeker thought about what had been said and, then, replied: “But I have wanted to be initiated for such a long time. I’m willing to do anything to prove my sincerity. I’m just asking for a chance to show you that I really am serious about my request.”

The guide weighed the remarks of the man. The teacher briefly studied the man, looked away, and returned his gaze to the seeker.

The mystic said: “OK, I’ll tell you what I am prepared to do. I am going to give you a task, and if you complete that task, I will initiate you.”

The seeker first was very happy, but a certain wariness swept across his face. He asked: “Is the task illegal, immoral, impossible, or beyond my ability?”

The teacher laughed and shook his head, indicating that the answer to all of the man’s concerns was ‘no’. He added: “The task, actually, is fairly simple and straightforward, but I don’t believe you will complete it.”

“Then, tell me what I have to do,” responded the seeker, “and, I will do my best to accomplish whatever task you might assign to me.”

The teacher said: “I want you to take off your shirt, go over to that variety store at the edge of the square, buy: a medium-size basket, some candy to put in the basket, a baseball cap, and various materials for making a sign to hang around your neck. When you have done all that, I would like you to return here and compose a sign which says: ‘If you will knock the cap from my head, I will give you a piece of candy.’ Upon completing the sign and using some string to suspend it around your neck, I want you to walk around the square with your basket full of candy, and wherever you find people, you should stop in front of them so they can read the sign and, if they choose, do what they must to get their piece of candy. And, you should do this until all the candy is gone. Moreover, from beginning to end, you cannot explain why you are doing what you are doing to anyone.”

After the nature of the task was outlined, the seeker protested: “I couldn’t possibly do this. I mean, what would people think of me? I would become a laughing stock of the town, not just now, but for some time to come. Please, give me some task other than this.”

The teacher looked at the man, his gaze fixed on the eyes of the would-be seeker. In a very loving and kind way, the guide said: “You see, I told you would not be able to do this. You’re still too preoccupied with what people think of you rather than being primarily concerned with what Divinity wishes from you.”


If you would like to order a copy of Mystical Horizons, just click here: Mystical Horizons


Anab Whitehouse

Expectations

Harboring expectations can be a major source of difficulty. This is true both for people who are considering initiation, as well as for those who already have stepped on to the path.

These expectations generally can be subsumed under roughly five categories. More specifically, one can have expectations in relation to: (1) God; (2) the spiritual guide; (3) the nature of the mystical path; (4) the conduct and character of other people on the path; and, (5) oneself.

One of the problems most of us have, in one form or another, is we try to stuff God into our theories and conceptual frameworks. On the basis of these perspectives, we develop a series of expectations about what God should be and how God should be.

Furthermore, we often set trials and tests which God is expected to ace if Divinity is to pass muster. For example, we may say to ourselves: "if God is to be a God worthy of our praise and worship, then God must do this or that and, thereby, meet our expectations of how God should act".

Alternatively, we may think to ourselves: if God wants our spiritual business, then God must be able to satisfy our carefully prepared 15-point diagnostic check list. We, then, proceed to try to hoist God up on the examination table and check for weaknesses, defects and warning signs.

Different people draw up different kinds of diagnostic check lists to run God through. However, all of these lists are rooted in expectations we have of how God should be.

We believe, for instance that God must be good, or God must be a loving God, or God must be just. In addition, we have our own incompletely worked out and, often inconsistent theories of goodness, love and justice. We, then, proceed to set up expectations which require God to conform to the structural requirements and values embedded in our thinking.

Rarely, do we stop and seek to discover what goodness, or love or justice mean to God. Rarely, do we ask ourselves what, if anything justifies our theories of goodness, love or justice.

Our opinions and beliefs are not justified just because we hold them to be so. Where is the reality check in all of this?

From the perspective of Sufi masters, we distance ourselves from God in direct proportion to the weight of the baggage of expectations we try to impose on God. Indeed, expectations are one of the ways through which veils of ignorance and darkness are generated on the path.

Furthermore, Sufi masters suggest we have the cart before the horse in this matter of expectation. If we wish to realize what can be expected from God, then, first, come to know God as God and not as a function of our theories about God. Let us open ourselves up to the reality of God and let God show us the errors in our various expectations.

People also can have strange sorts of expectations about a spiritual guide. Upon meeting a teacher, we often expect: a spiritual version of fireworks; or, a dazzling, ethereal floor show; or, a display of beautiful, other-worldly lights and auras to be radiating from the countenance of the shaykh; or, breathtaking discourses which probe into the inner sanctum of metaphysical truths.

If we don't experience these, we are disappointed. Our expectations have been violated.

We begin to have doubts about the authenticity of the teacher. After all, if this person were truly a spiritual guide, then, surely, this individual would be this way or that way.

The irony of the situation is this. All of the things we, however unfairly and unjustifiably, may expect concerning the nature of a spiritual guide could be occurring before our eyes, ears, and minds, but we are too blind and ignorant to grasp the reality of what is in front of us.

Notwithstanding the foregoing considerations, one should keep in mind that there are spiritual charlatans who will mention such possiblities in self-serving ways. In other words, they will either use the expectations of seekers to mislead them about what the future holds in store, or such spiritul frauds will use these kinds of expectation as part of a "spiritual lesson" about why a seeker ought not to expect such a guide to be required to live in accordance with ordinary principles of morality.

God is not under any obligation to disclose spiritual secrets to every Tom, Dick and Mary who comes along. Similarly, spiritual guides are under no compulsion to share their secrets either.

In addition, we are being presumptuous to suppose our condition is sufficiently worthy to be permitted access to such realities. Although, sometimes, even when we are not worthy of such participation, spiritual generosity comes to our rescue.

In any event, the absence of perceived mystical "signs" in the being or demeanor of someone who may or may not be a genuine spiritual is neither here nor there. A person could be an authentic teacher, and, yet, we might not sense anything "special" about that person. At the same time, the absence of visible marks of grace does not necessarily permit us to conclude the individual is a genuine teacher who is merely veiling herself or himself from others.

The fact of the matter is, if we really knew what was what, spiritually speaking, we wouldn't be in the predicament of having to find a teacher. In the mean time, we tend to thrash around in the dense jungle of our expectations of things.

In concert with the foregoing kind of expectations, there is a tendency on the part of many people to confuse the purely human side of a teacher with the spiritual side of a teacher. For example, we may meet someone who is, let us assume, a genuine teacher.

Perhaps, we see this person eating, and we think to ourselves: Gee! This person eats more than a guide should eat; or, the way the teacher eats somehow doesn't sit right with our expectations of how a spiritual person ought to eat - whatever way that is.

Maybe the guide watches television or goes to movies. Again, this may jar our spiritual sensibilities.

Maybe the teacher has interests or activities which are inconsistent with our expectations concerning the nature of a shaykh. Maybe the guide does not exhibit as much: patience, tolerance, laughter, and so on, as we feel is appropriate or in the way we deem to be proper.

Without, in any way, wishing to maintain that a spiritual guide has license to do anything and everything he or she pleases, and without wishing to say there are no constraints of propriety within which a teacher is bound to operate, nonetheless, there are degrees of freedom available to a teacher. Through these permissible degrees of freedom, the teacher can give expression to the purely human side without compromising the spiritual side of things.

The friends of God come in many shapes, sizes, colors, temperaments, and capacities. They are not all the same, nor do they need to be.

The operative words in the above are "friends of God". A friend of God makes sincere, heartfelt efforts not do anything on the human side which might undermine, or adversely affect, the spiritual side. God, on the other hand, permits friends to have some discretion in how they conduct their human lives.

However, sometimes, even friends make mistakes. When this is brought to their attention by the Friend, they repent and seek God's forgiveness.

Most of us, are not in any position to sort out possible spiritual mistakes of the friends of God, from the degrees of latitude which God has permitted to those same friends. To be sure, one ought not to abandon one's capacity for critical reflection in relation to such issues, nevertheless, one is entering very dangerous and tricky territory when one establishes a set of expectations to which the teacher must conform in order to be adjudged an authentic teacher.

Almost everyone who is contemplating stepping onto the mystical path or who already has done so, has many expectations about the nature of the spiritual path. For instance, one may have expectations about how easy or difficult the mystical journey is going to be.

One also may have expectations about what one will receive from pursuing the path, such as mystical powers, spiritual gifts, visions, insights, goals and so on. In addition, one may have expectations about how and when and where and why mystical experiences take place.

One reads or hears about some of the mystical experiences of others. As a result, one builds up expectations concerning the arrival of such experiences in one's own case.

Sufi masters point out there are a number of things one can do to help make the spiritual journey go more easily and more quickly. One of these beneficial actions is to throw overboard, without a life preserver, one's expectations about the nature of the Sufi path. The sooner one does this, the better off one will be.

Every spiritual journey is unique because everyone's relationship with God is unique. While there are shared themes and concerns from one journey to the next, one should just let the path unfold of its own accord and in its own way.

If we look after our responsibilities, the path will look after its responsibilities. Expectations only delay and complicate matters.

In addition to our expectations concerning God, the spiritual guide and the nature of the mystical path, we also frequently tend to have expectations with respect to other people, both those on, as well as those outside of, the Sufi journey. For instance, we may have expectations about how they ought to, or will, behave or what they will and will not understand.

We also may have expectations about their interests, commitments and values. Alternatively, we may have expectations about what their lifestyle is like and so on.

Quite often, people who are not on a mystical journey, at least in any discernible sense, will surprise one with the depth of their understanding about spiritual matters. This surprise is the result of an expectation concerning such people.

One could run into people outside of the path who may exhibit a variety of spiritual qualities, commitments and interests that one might have thought would only be found by someone who had taken initiation with a spiritual guide. The unexpected dimension of such an encounter is, once again, the sign of an expectation which is being rebuffed.

On the other hand, one may meet with people who have become initiated into a mystical tradition, and, yet, they don't seem to understand anything of a spiritual nature. Moreover, such people may not be leading the sort of lifestyle one thought would be second nature to a wayfarer of the mystical way. Here, too, expectations are being exposed.

According to the Sufi masters, the best policy is not to have any expectations at all, either with respect to people on, or outside of, the mystical path. If one does this, one will never be disappointed, and, more often than not, one will be able to appreciate people on their own terms.

We all have spiritual potential. We all have spiritual problems. We all have our strengths and weaknesses. We all have dimensions we hold in common, and we all have our unique qualities.

Sufi masters suggest we should not meet others with expectations. Instead, we should meet them with friendship.

Finally, we all carry expectations concerning ourselves in relationship to the mystical path. Some of these expectations are rooted in low self-esteem. Other of these expectations are embedded in high self-esteem.

The masters of the Sufi path suggest we dispense with both kinds of expectations. The practitioners of the Sufi path indicate that if we get rid of these kinds of expectations, then, God willing, we will become receptive to truths about our essential self which will put to shame both our sense of low-esteem as well as our feelings of high-esteem.

Anab Whitehouse

"What I know of the divine science and Holy Scripture I learnt in woods and fields." ~St. Bernard (1091 - 1153) Epistle 106

An American Eagle soars above the Mattawamkeag River yesterday. "Mattawamkeag" is a Native word for "river of rocks."

Hands

Hands of life reach out for the unknown,
grasping, searching for what God has sown
in the way of a fate not yet shown.

Hands, vulnerable and innocent,
filled with a youth that is not yet bent
by choices that are still to be spent.

Distant horizons sparkle in the sun
as time is let loose to run
through hands struggling with deeds to be done.

Hands of hope, hands of uncertainty,
needing to learn how living can be
a way to truth and identity.

What secrets will these hands reveal
groping about, looking for the real
amidst falsehoods that events conceal?

Unseen burdens rest upon these hands …
hard-fought struggles in shifting sands
on beachheads of future, warring lands.

Whose troubled face will these hands caress?
Which mysteries will these hands address?
What weighty problems will they assess?

Hands of potential that can reach and touch
our hearts in so many ways with such
joy and pain that are, at times, too much.

For these untested hands, let us pray
that God will bless them every day
with a faith that triumphs over dismay.

Anab