Jiddu Krishnamurti’s writing is holographic. You can open most any of his books, read a few pages, and get a glimpse of the core of his paradoxical-seeming message, that there is no message, no teacher, no path to truth that can be communicated through words, through symbols, through any teaching. “The truth is a pathless land.”
He emphasizes repeatedly that neither he nor any other teacher, authority, or system of beliefs can lead you or me to truth, reality, the Sacred, the Mystery. I have found that reading his writings and using them as a springboard to my own personal explorations has been one of the most liberating parts of my life (your mileage may vary, of course).
I had intended to explore a different area tonight, but this morning I came across an author note by Jodi Picoult titled “Stop Thinking of Beliefs As Absolutes,” and I was struck by how parts of it seemed to echo Krishnamurti’s “truth is a pathless land.”
While I’ve heard of the Gnostic Gospels, I’ve not read anything from them, so this was sort of a cool thing to find out. While some of the spiritual and sacred aspects of life sort of shine out from the world around me on my quiet, aware days, I’m not a big fan of religion.
Like it or not, we each choose our own path, and to me religions, especially the fundamentalist variety, often feel like clubs or gangs, with each group stridently claiming that they have a lock on truth and that anyone who doesn’t believe what they believe is wrong (and possibly an agent of evil) … and that the absolute ruler of the universe will personally make sure that anyone who doesn’t believe what their church believes will be really, really sorry.
And then there are the quiet people who sincerely practice their faith that God is Love and that their life task is to practice lovingkindness, forgiveness, acceptance. If you’re in that group, keep on truckin’, I’m proud to share the planet with you.
Anyway, here’s an excerpt from Jodi’s author note (for her new book, “Change of Heart”) … the emphasized portions are my doing.
It was this focus on the differences between people, instead of the commonalities, that led to the second branch of research for Change of Heart—namely, the history of religion. Everyone knows which gospels made it into the Bible, but very few people realize that there was a history behind that editorial decision. In 1945, two brothers were digging for fertilizer in Nag Hammadi, Egypt, when they found an earthenware jug filled with leatherbound texts. They burned some for firewood and the rest made their way to scholars, who identified them as the Gnostic Gospels.
As it turns out, in the years after Jesus’s death, Christianity was a mess. There were tons of groups calling themselves Christian, and all believing different things. The Gnostics were one of these groups. Gnosis means “knowledge” in Greek. They believe that being Christian was a good start, but to truly reach spiritual enlightenment, you had to find a secret knowledge—the truth that there is a little bit of divinity in all of us and that the journey to find it is unique for everyone.
According to the Gnostic Christians, you didn’t need a priest to help you find God, because you were already a part of God. Jesus wasn’t a savior, just a guide. Religion was deeply personal—you couldn’t believe what anyone told you to believe, because you had to find your own path to spiritual fulfillment. To that end, you should always be asking questions about faith, instead of believing what you were told. They followed multiple gospels, which preached this secret teaching, including one I particularly like, the Gospel of Thomas. It sounds much more like Buddhism or mystical Judaism than a traditional gospel. It’s full of riddles and cryptic quotes, such as: “If you bring forth what is within you, what is within you will save you. If you do not bring forth what is within you, what is within you will destroy you.” Well, when I read that, I knew exactly how Shay Bourne would interpret it: He’d want to donate his heart.
You can imagine how threatening the beliefs of the Gnostic Christians were to the early Christian church, which was trying to unify itself. Iraneus, the bishop of Lyons, decided he’d had enough and set about standardizing the Christian faith. He picked four gospels that were important to him—Matthew, Mark, and Luke—which all followed a history of Jesus’s life—and John, because he’d distantly known the author. He said that all other gospels were heresy and thereby made an editorial decision that’s lasted 2000 years.
To be honest, if Iraneus hadn’t done this, Christianity would probably have died out in a mess of infighting. And yet—the baby got thrown out with the bathwater. By getting rid of those Gnostic texts, Christians also dismissed the belief that people might reach spiritual enlightenment in a bunch of ways, not just one right way. Isn’t it fascinating to think about what the world might look like today, if Iraneus had chosen a Gnostic gospel, instead of the Gospel of John?
So what I see here is more of “Ya gotta find truth on your own,” this time from a Christian-related perspective. Just thought this was a cool thing to run across now, while I’m looking around in this general area. Synchronicity?
Mary’s in bed, getting sleep for an early job tomorrow. Think I’ll join her, get my cat Leona off my lap (and my already-going-to-sleep legs) & onto the bed beside me. That’s Leona’s pic you see by the comments on this site.
Blessed Be we, each and every one. ‘Nite, all.
